Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the assessee, being an urban development authority carrying out town planning and allied public utility functions, was hit by the proviso to section 2(15) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and consequently denied exemption under section 11.
Analysis: The authority was constituted for planned and controlled urban development, with its activities confined to development of infrastructure and public services such as roads, drainage, water supply and allied amenities. Its receipts were regulatory in nature, including government grants and prescribed levies, and the available material showed that the income was applied for the public purpose for which the authority was created. The decision followed binding jurisdictional precedents holding that where a statutory development authority performs its public functions without an element of trade, commerce or business and without profiteering, the proviso to section 2(15) does not apply. On that basis, the denial of exemption under sections 11 and 12 was not sustainable.
Conclusion: The proviso to section 2(15) did not apply, and the assessee remained entitled to exemption under section 11.
Ratio Decidendi: A statutory urban development authority engaged in public infrastructure and town-planning functions, collecting regulatory charges without a profit motive, is not carrying on trade, commerce or business for the purposes of the proviso to section 2(15), and its exemption under section 11 cannot be denied on that ground.