MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

2(15) of Act, 1961 and would not be disqualified by attracting proviso thereto. Pam 71. Entire discussion, if we summarize, can be placed in a small arena of judicial analysis, that is, a body or institution which is functioning for advancement of objects of general public utility and its activities are not in the nature of trade, business

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

2(15) of Act, 1961 and would not be disqualified by attracting proviso thereto. Pam 71. Entire discussion, if we summarize, can be placed in a small arena of judicial analysis, that is, a body or institution which is functioning for advancement of objects of general public utility and its activities are not in the nature of trade, business

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

2(15) of Act, 1961 and would not be disqualified by attracting proviso thereto. Pam 71. Entire discussion, if we summarize, can be placed in a small arena of judicial analysis, that is, a body or institution which is functioning for advancement of objects of general public utility and its activities are not in the nature of trade, business

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

2(15) of Act, 1961 and would not be disqualified by attracting proviso thereto. Pam 71. Entire discussion, if we summarize, can be placed in a small arena of judicial analysis, that is, a body or institution which is functioning for advancement of objects of general public utility and its activities are not in the nature of trade, business

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

2(15) of Act, 1961 and would not be disqualified by attracting proviso thereto. Pam 71. Entire discussion, if we summarize, can be placed in a small arena of judicial analysis, that is, a body or institution which is functioning for advancement of objects of general public utility and its activities are not in the nature of trade, business

DCIT (E) 2(1), MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI RAILWAY VIKAS CORPN LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, all the Four appeals filed by the revenue and four cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

section 2(15) of the Act, nonetheless the test of dominant object of an entity would be relevant to determine whether the entity is carrying on business or not. In the present case, there is little doubt that the objects of the activities of the petitioner are entirely for charitable purposes. WP(C) 1872/13 Page 48 of 55 Finally

DCIT (E) 2(1), MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI RAILWAY VIKAS CORPN LTD, MUMBAI

section 2(15) of the Act, nonetheless the test of dominant object of an entity would be relevant to determine whether the entity is carrying on business or not. In the present case, there is little doubt that the objects of the activities of the petitioner are entirely for charitable purposes. WP(C) 1872/13 Page 48 of 55 Finally

DCIT (E) 2(1), MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI RAILWAY VIKAS CORPN LTD, MUMBAI

section 2(15) of the Act, nonetheless the test of dominant object of an entity would be relevant to determine whether the entity is carrying on business or not. In the present case, there is little doubt that the objects of the activities of the petitioner are entirely for charitable purposes. WP(C) 1872/13 Page 48 of 55 Finally

DCIT (E) 2(1), MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI RAILWAY VIKAS CORPN LTD, MUMBAI

section 2(15) of the Act, nonetheless the test of dominant object of an entity would be relevant to determine whether the entity is carrying on business or not. In the present case, there is little doubt that the objects of the activities of the petitioner are entirely for charitable purposes. WP(C) 1872/13 Page 48 of 55 Finally

MEDIA RESEARCH USERS COUNCIL,MUMBAI vs. ASST DIT I(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Section 2(15) clearly provides that if the aggregate value of the receipts from the activities exceeds Rs.10 lakhs, then where the object is any other object of general public utility, shall not be a charitable purpose. Here, the gross receipts of the assessee is more than Rs.10 lakhs and therefore, assessee has to be considered as non- charitable organization

MEDIA RESEARCH USERS COUNCIL,MUMBAI vs. DDIT I(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Section 2(15) clearly provides that if the aggregate value of the receipts from the activities exceeds Rs.10 lakhs, then where the object is any other object of general public utility, shall not be a charitable purpose. Here, the gross receipts of the assessee is more than Rs.10 lakhs and therefore, assessee has to be considered as non- charitable organization

MEDIA RESEARCH USERS COUNCIL,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E) 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Section 2(15) clearly provides that if the aggregate value of the receipts from the activities exceeds Rs.10 lakhs, then where the object is any other object of general public utility, shall not be a charitable purpose. Here, the gross receipts of the assessee is more than Rs.10 lakhs and therefore, assessee has to be considered as non- charitable organization

MEDIA RESEARCH USERS COUNCIL,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (E) 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Section 2(15) clearly provides that if the aggregate value of the receipts from the activities exceeds Rs.10 lakhs, then where the object is any other object of general public utility, shall not be a charitable purpose. Here, the gross receipts of the assessee is more than Rs.10 lakhs and therefore, assessee has to be considered as non- charitable organization

MEDIA RESEARCH USERS COUNCIL,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) I(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Section 2(15) clearly provides that if the aggregate value of the receipts from the activities exceeds Rs.10 lakhs, then where the object is any other object of general public utility, shall not be a charitable purpose. Here, the gross receipts of the assessee is more than Rs.10 lakhs and therefore, assessee has to be considered as non- charitable organization

ASSOCIATION OF MUTUAL FUNDS IN INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(E)-1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the present appeal is allowed

section 2(15) of the Act, nonetheless the test of dominant object of an entity would be relevant to determine whether ITA. No. 5761 & 5762/Mum/2015 & 6888/Mum/2016 Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 the entity is carrying on business or not. In the present case, there is little doubt that the objects of the activities of the petitioner

INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTIONS 2(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. THE CHEMBUR GYMKHANA, MUMBAI

Appeals of the revenue are allowed for

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Smt.Renu Jauhriआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 46, 47, 48 & 491/Mum/2025 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14, 2015-16,2016-17 & 2018-19) Income Tax Officer V/S. The Chembur Exemptions 2(4), Gymkhana बनाम Mumbai 16Th Road Chembur, Room No. 609, 6Th Floor, Mumbai 40071 Mtnl Building, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai 400026 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaatt4163F .. Appellant/अपीलाथ" Respondent/""तवाद"

section 2(15) as applicable in the cases of the GPUs. Ld. DR has also filed P a g e | 8 ITA No. 46,47,48 & 491/Mum/2025 The Chembur Gymkhana written submissions and further placed reliance on the decision of the co- ordinate bench in the case of DCIT(E) Vs. Association of Mutual Funds in India

INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTIONS 2(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. THE CHEMBUR GYMKHANA, MUMBAI

Appeals of the revenue are allowed for

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Smt.Renu Jauhriआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 46, 47, 48 & 491/Mum/2025 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14, 2015-16,2016-17 & 2018-19) Income Tax Officer V/S. The Chembur Exemptions 2(4), Gymkhana बनाम Mumbai 16Th Road Chembur, Room No. 609, 6Th Floor, Mumbai 40071 Mtnl Building, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai 400026 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaatt4163F .. Appellant/अपीलाथ" Respondent/""तवाद"

section 2(15) as applicable in the cases of the GPUs. Ld. DR has also filed P a g e | 8 ITA No. 46,47,48 & 491/Mum/2025 The Chembur Gymkhana written submissions and further placed reliance on the decision of the co- ordinate bench in the case of DCIT(E) Vs. Association of Mutual Funds in India

INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTIONS 2(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. THE CHEMBUR GYMKHANA, MUMBAI

Appeals of the revenue are allowed for

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Smt.Renu Jauhriआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 46, 47, 48 & 491/Mum/2025 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14, 2015-16,2016-17 & 2018-19) Income Tax Officer V/S. The Chembur Exemptions 2(4), Gymkhana बनाम Mumbai 16Th Road Chembur, Room No. 609, 6Th Floor, Mumbai 40071 Mtnl Building, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai 400026 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaatt4163F .. Appellant/अपीलाथ" Respondent/""तवाद"

section 2(15) as applicable in the cases of the GPUs. Ld. DR has also filed P a g e | 8 ITA No. 46,47,48 & 491/Mum/2025 The Chembur Gymkhana written submissions and further placed reliance on the decision of the co- ordinate bench in the case of DCIT(E) Vs. Association of Mutual Funds in India

INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTIONS 2(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. THE CHEMBUR GYMKHANA, MUMBAI

Appeals of the revenue are allowed for

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Smt.Renu Jauhriआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 46, 47, 48 & 491/Mum/2025 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14, 2015-16,2016-17 & 2018-19) Income Tax Officer V/S. The Chembur Exemptions 2(4), Gymkhana बनाम Mumbai 16Th Road Chembur, Room No. 609, 6Th Floor, Mumbai 40071 Mtnl Building, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai 400026 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaatt4163F .. Appellant/अपीलाथ" Respondent/""तवाद"

section 2(15) as applicable in the cases of the GPUs. Ld. DR has also filed P a g e | 8 ITA No. 46,47,48 & 491/Mum/2025 The Chembur Gymkhana written submissions and further placed reliance on the decision of the co- ordinate bench in the case of DCIT(E) Vs. Association of Mutual Funds in India