Supreme Court of India
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) versus AHMEDABAD URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY on 3 November 2022
[2022] 8 S.C.R. 581
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS)
v.
AHMEDABAD URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 1849 OF 2022
IN
(Civil Appeal No. 21762 of 2017)
NOVEMBER 03, 2022
[UDAY UMESH LALIT, CJI, S. RAVINDRA BHAT ANDPAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, JJ.]
Income Tax Act, 1961: s.2(15) – Revenue sought clarificationof the judgment dated 19.10.2022 – The said judgment consideredthe interpretation of s.2(15) in relation to charitable trusts whichengage in activities that further objects of general public utility – Itwas urged on behalf of the revenue, that in Para 253 H and in Para254, it was precluded from examining the facts and assessing theconcerned assessment years, in relation to the assessees in theseappeals – Held: A plain reading of the conclusions recorded inPara 253 (A)(B)(C) (D) and (E) would disclose that this courtconsciously recorded its findings, with the intent of finally decidingthe issues, for various organizations- in relation to the assessmentyears in question, whereas in Para 253 (F), the court remitted thematter for examination and orders by the assessing officer –Similarly, the conclusion in Para 253 G, was conclusive with respectto the claim of private trusts; the appeals were dismissed – Referenceto application of the law declared by this court’s judgment, therefore,has to be understood in the context, which is that they apply for theassessment years in question, which were before this court and weredecided; wherever the appeals were decided against the revenue,they are to be treated as final – However, reference to futureapplication is to be decided by the concerned authorities by applyingthe law declared by judgment having regard to the facts of eachassessment year.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : MiscellaneousApplication No.1849 of 2022. In Civil Appeal No.21762 of 2017.
581
A
B
C
DEF
G
H
AFrom the Judgment and Order dated 19.10.2022 in C.A. No.21762of 2017 of the Supreme Court of India.
N. Venkataraman, ASG, Rupesh Kumar, Ms. Gargi Khanna, Ms.Alka Aggarwal, V. Chandrashekara Bharathi, Ms. Amrita, Raj BahadurYadav, Jasmeet Singh, Saif Ali, Pushpendra S. Bhadoriya, Divjot SinghBBhatia, Ms. Rusheet Saluja, Ms. Mamta Chakraborty, Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Rishabh Sancheti, K. Paarivendhan, Ms. Deepanwita Priyanka, Advs.for the appearing parties.
The Order of the Court was passed by
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.
C
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. By this application, the revenue seeks a clarification of thejudgment dated 19.10.2022, delivered by this court, in CA 21762/2017and connected appeals. The clarification sought is that para 254 of thejudgment should be such as to “enable the Revenue to redo theassessments in accordance with the above judgments for the pastDand examine the eligibility on a yearly basis for the future and thusrender justice.”
2. This court, by the judgment in question, had considered andpronounced upon the interpretation of Section 2 (15) of the Income TaxAct, 1961, in relation to charitable trusts which engage in activities thatEfurther objects of general public utility. The activities and cases of variouskinds of charities, trusts and organizations, including statutory corporationsand bodies, regulatory bodies, non- statutory regulatory bodies, tradeorganizations and bodies, sports bodies and organizations, trusts, etc wereconsidered by the court, and dealt with in the judgment. Para 253 recordedFthe court’s summary of conclusions in relation to each such trust, charityor organization.
3. It was urged on behalf of the revenue, that the clarification itseeks is necessary, because in Para 253 H and in Para 254, it has beenprecluded from examining the facts and assessing the concernedassessment years, in relation to the assesses in these appeals. It wasGurged that the conclusions recorded in the judgment and those in the saidtwo paragraphs, preclude it from dealing with the assessments of partiesbefore this court and, furthermore, the dismissal of the revenue’s appealswill preclude an examination of the merits for these assesses in future,as well.
H
4. A plain reading of the conclusions recorded in Para 253(A)(B)(C) (D) and (E) would disclose that this court consciously recordedits findings, with the intent of finally deciding the issues, for variousorganizations- in relation to the assessment years in question, - whereasin Para 253 (F), the court remitted the matter for examination and ordersby the assessing officer. Similarly, the conclusion in Para 253 G, wasconclusive with respect to the claim of private trusts; the appeals weredismissed. These conclusions are accurately reflected in the final,operative directions in Para 254. In Para 254 (i) to (iv), the conclusionsrecorded are against the revenue. However, in Para 254 (v), (vi), (vii)and (vii), the conclusions, are in favour of the revenue.
5. The reference to application of the law declared by this court’sjudgment, therefore, has to be understood in the context, which is thatthey apply for the assessment years in question, which were before thiscourt and were decided;wherever the appeals were decided against therevenue, they are to be treated as final. However, the reference to futureapplication has to be understood in this context, which is that for theassessment years which this court was not called upon to decide, theconcerned authorities will apply the law declared in the judgment, havingregard to the facts of each such assessment year. In view of thisdiscussion, no further clarification is necessary or called for.
6. The application M.A. No. 1849 of 2022 is disposed of in theabove terms.
Devika Gujral(Assisted by : Shevali Monga, LCRA)
Miscellaneous Application disposed of.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H