Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be discontinued on 31-07-2025
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please
let us know via our feedback form
so we can address them promptly.
Home
2016 (6) TMI 846 - HC - Income TaxRevenue receipt of society - collection by the assessee society as interest free loan from incoming members as a binding precondition for becoming a member - Held that - The issue arising herein namely loans taken from incoming members which have in fact been returned to the incoming members cannot be treated as Income of the respondent assessee. This issue stands concluded against the Revenue and in favour of the respondent assessee by the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Siddheshwar Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of IncomeTax (2004 (9) TMI 6 - SUPREME Court ). Sale of four flats constructed by the Society by utilising additional FSI available with it - treatment as business income - Held that - Tribunal on examination of the facts before it has came to the conclusion that the contribution of Rs. 1.10 Crores received by the Society was from its members (four new members) and the allotment of four new tenaments was also done only to the existing members. It is an undisputed position that the four new members were members of the Society prior to the allotment of the tenaments to them and also before making their contribution. It is not the case of the Revenue that there is absence of complete identity of the contributors and participants of the Society. So far the second test is concerned viz. that the actions of the Society must be in furtherance of the object of the Society. This is also satisfied. This is so as it is not the case of the Revenue that building tenaments and giving it to its members is not the object of the Society. Thirdly there is no scope for profiteering in the present facts as the members have not purchased the flat but have only got a right to occupy a tenament allotted by the Society. Thus on facts the Tribunal has so held without specifically referring to the three tests. Thus on facts the view taken by the impugned order stand covered in favour of the respondent Society.
|