Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority
[Citation -2022-LL-1103-10]

Citation 2022-LL-1103-10
Appellant Name Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions)
Respondent Name Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority
Court SUPREME COURT
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 03/11/2022
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags miscellaneous application • appellate jurisdiction • development authority
Bot Summary: The clarification sought is that para 254 of the judgment should be such as to enable the Revenue to redo the assessments in accordance with the above judgments for the past and examine the eligibility on a yearly basis for the future and thus render justice. Para 253 recorded the court s summary of conclusions in relation to each such trust, charity or organization. A plain reading of the conclusions recorded in Para 253(B)(C) and would disclose that this court consciously recorded its findings, with the intent of finally deciding the issues, for various organizations- in relation to the assessment years in question, - whereas in Para 253, the court remitted the matter for examination and orders by the assessing officer. The conclusion in Para 253 G, was conclusive with respect to the claim of private trusts; the appeals were dismissed. In Para 254 to, the conclusions recorded are against the revenue. In Para 254,, and, the conclusions, are in favour of the revenue. The reference to application of the law declared by this court s judgment has to be understood in the context, which is that they apply for the assessment years in question, which were before this court and were decided; wherever the appeals were decided against the revenue, they are to be treated as final.


1 REPORTABLE IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 1849 OF 2022 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 21762 OF 2017 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS AHMEDABAD URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ...RESPONDENT(S) ORDER S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J. 1. By this application, revenue seeks clarification of judgment dated 19.10.2022, delivered by this court, in CA 21762/2017 and connected appeals. clarification sought is that para 254 of judgment should be such as to enable Revenue to redo assessments in accordance with above judgments for past and examine eligibility on yearly basis for future and thus render justice. 2. This court, by judgment in question, had considered and pronounced Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Neetu Khajuria upon interpretation of Section 2 (15) of Income Tax Act, 1961, in relation Date: 2022.11.03 16:49:48 IST Reason: to charitable trusts which engage in activities that further objects of general public utility. activities and cases of various kinds of charities, trusts and 2 organizations, including statutory corporations and bodies, regulatory bodies, non- statutory regulatory bodies, trade organizations and bodies, sports bodies and organizations, trusts, etc were considered by court, and dealt with in judgment. Para 253 recorded court s summary of conclusions in relation to each such trust, charity or organization. 3. It was urged on behalf of revenue, that clarification it seeks is necessary, because in Para 253 H and in Para 254, it has been precluded from examining facts and assessing concerned assessment years, in relation to assesses in these appeals. It was urged that conclusions recorded in judgment and those in said two paragraphs, preclude it from dealing with assessments of parties before this court and, furthermore, dismissal of revenue s appeals will preclude examination of merits for these assesses in future, as well. 4. plain reading of conclusions recorded in Para 253 (A)(B)(C) (D) and (E) would disclose that this court consciously recorded its findings, with intent of finally deciding issues, for various organizations- in relation to assessment years in question, - whereas in Para 253 (F), court remitted matter for examination and orders by assessing officer. Similarly, conclusion in Para 253 G, was conclusive with respect to claim of private trusts; appeals were dismissed. These conclusions are accurately reflected in final, operative directions in Para 254. In Para 254 (i) to (iv), conclusions recorded are against revenue. However, in Para 254 (v), (vi), (vii) and (vii), conclusions, are in favour of revenue. 3 5. reference to application of law declared by this court s judgment, therefore, has to be understood in context, which is that they apply for assessment years in question, which were before this court and were decided; wherever appeals were decided against revenue, they are to be treated as final. However, reference to future application has to be understood in this context, which is that for assessment years which this court was not called upon to decide, concerned authorities will apply law declared in judgment, having regard to facts of each such assessment year. In view of this discussion, no further clarification is necessary or called for. 6. application M.A. No. 1849 of 2022 is disposed of in above terms. .. ...CJI. [UDAY UMESH LALIT] ..J. [S. RAVINDRA BHAT] .J. [PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA] New Delhi, November 03, 2022. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority
Report Error