9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Whether the profits arising from the sales made to the regular members of the club are entitled to exemption on the doctrine of mutuality. 2. Whether the directions given by the Tribunal are valid in law. Summary: Issue 1: Exemption on the Doctrine of Mutuality The assessee, Bankipur Club Ltd., is a club incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, with its main object being to afford its members all the usual privileges, advantages, conveniences, and accommodation of a club. The ITO initiated proceedings u/s 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment years 1960-61 to 1964-65, assessing the club under various heads, including the sale of drinks at the bar. The ITO held that profit from the sale proceeds of the drinks by the club is income and liable to be taxed. The AAC upheld this decision, stating that the principle of mutuality did not apply. The Appellate Tribunal, however, agreed with the club's submission that the principle of mutuality applied to the transaction of sale of drinks at the bar. The Tribunal concluded that the activities inter se between the members are entitled to mutuality, and profits arising from any transaction with an outsider are liable to taxation. The Tribunal remanded the case to the ITO for a fresh decision regarding temporary members and left open the question of whether temporary members are considered outsiders for assessment purposes. The High Court, after considering the facts and relevant case laws, including CIT v. Kumbakonam Mutual Benefit Fund Ltd. [1964] 53 ITR 241 (SC) and CIT v. Merchant Navy Club [1974] 96 ITR 261 (AP), held that the principle of mutuality would apply to the transactions of sale by the club to its members. The court noted that the club does not deal with outsiders in relation to the sale of drinks, and the transactions are confined only to the members. Therefore, the profit arising from sales to regular members is not liable to be taxed on the principle of mutuality. Issue 2: Validity of Tribunal's Directions The Tribunal directed the ITO to assess the profits of the drinking bar arising from service done to non-members and left open the question of whether temporary members are considered outsiders for this purpose. The High Court found these directions valid in law, emphasizing that the principle of mutuality applies to transactions among members, and any profit arising from transactions with outsiders is taxable. Conclusion: The High Court answered both questions in the affirmative, agreeing with the Tribunal's decision that the principle of mutuality applies to the transactions of sale by the club to its members and that the directions given by the Tribunal are valid in law. The court did not award any costs.
|
