COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS CHD vs. SHANTI DEVI EDUCATIONAL TRUST MODEL TOWN REWARI
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the findings of fact recorded by the ITAT were not shown to be illegal or perverse, warranting no interference. The Court noted that the ITAT had allowed the assessee's appeal, directing the deletion of the addition and treating the assessee as a registered trust with charitable objects. The ITAT's reasoning, as detailed in the judgment, was that while registration under Section 12AA was granted w.e.f. 1.4.2009 (before the assessment order date of 30.12.2011), obtaining such registration was not mandatory for claiming exemption under Section 10(23C)(iiiad). The Tribunal found that the assessee's objects were charitable, and the donations were meant for these objects, even though educational activities had not commenced. The Court also referred to precedents from the Madras High Court and its own previous decision in a similar case involving the same assessee, which were decided against the revenue. Therefore, no substantial question of law arose, and the appeal was dismissed.
What were the facts?
The assessee, Smt. Shanti Devi Educational Trust, sought registration under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. For the assessment year 2007-08 (financial year 2006-07), the trust received corpus donations, including agricultural land valued at ₹1.01 crore and cash donations of ₹15 lacs. The trust had not filed a return of income for this period. The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated proceedings under Section 148, and noting the trust was not registered under Section 12AA, added ₹1,15,03,000/- to its taxable income. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's order. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) allowed the assessee's appeal, directing the deletion of the addition and treating the assessee as a registered trust with charitable objects. The revenue appealed this decision to the High Court.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the ITAT was justified in treating the assessee as a registered trust for the assessment year 2007-08, despite the trust not being registered under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act for that year? (Question of law) 2. Whether the ITAT was justified in deleting the addition of ₹1,15,03,000/- when the assessee was not registered under Section 12AA of the Act for the assessment year 2007-08? (Question of mixed law and fact) Assessee's contentions: The assessee argued it was entitled to benefit under Section 10(23C)(iiiad) as annual receipts were below the prescribed limit. The gift of land valued at ₹1.01 crore should not be included in annual receipts. The trust was in the process of starting its educational activities, having received land as corpus donation. Revenue's contentions: The revenue contended that the assessee was granted registration under Section 12AA effective from 1.4.2009, which was for subsequent periods, not for the assessment year 2007-08. Therefore, the amounts of ₹1.01 crore and ₹14 lacs totalling ₹1.15 crores were rightly taxed by the AO.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
ITA No. 282 of 2015
Date of decision: 23.2.2017
The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh
……Appellant
Vs.
Smt.Shanti Devi Educational Trust, 315-L, Model Town, Rewari
…..Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN
Present: Mr. Denesh Goyal, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. Ved Jain, Advocate for the respondent.
Ajay Kumar Mittal,J.
This appeal has been preferred by the appellant-revenue under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, “the Act”) against the order dated 10.12.2014, Annexure A.III passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘G’ New Delhi (in short, “the Tribunal”) in ITA No.639/Del/2013, for the assessment year 2007-08, claiming following substantial questions of law:- “i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble ITAT Delhi Bench “G” New Delhi is justified in deciding that the assessee be treated as registered trust though the trust was not registered under section 12AA of the Income Tax Act? ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble ITAT Delhi Bench “G” New Delhi is justified in deleting the addition of ` 1,15,03,000/- despite the fact that the assessee was not registered under section 12AA of the Income Tax Act?
A few facts relevant for the decision of the controversy Gurbax Singh 2017.04.03 16:25 involved as narrated in the appeal may be noticed. During the course of registration proceedings under section 12AA of the Act, the assessee trust submitted audited accounts for the financial years 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09. On perusal of the balance sheet for the financial year 2006-07 relevant to the assessment year 2007-08, it was observed that the trust had collected a sum of ` 1,15,05,100/- as corpus fund. As the trust was neither registered under section 12AA nor under section 10(23C) (vi) of the Act during the year under consideration, the excess of income over expenditure was chargeable to tax. The assessee trust had not filed its return of income for the assessment year 2007-08 relevant to the financial year 2006-07. Notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued and case was selected for scrutiny assessment. The Assessing Officer held that as the assessee was not registered under section 12AA of the Act during the year under consideration, it was not eligible for exemption on account of corpus donation and excess of receipts over expenditure were added to taxable income, which was assessed at ` 1,15,03,000/-. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. Vide order dated 12.12.2012, Annexure A.II, the CIT(A) upheld the additions made by the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee holding that the assessee was not registered under Section 12AA of the Act for the year under consideration and as such the corpus donations were liable to be included as income. The assessee trust filed further appeal before the Tribunal. Vide order dated 10.12.2014, Annexure A.III, the Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee holding that the CIT(A) was not justified in upholding the action of the Assessing Officer on the basis that no registration under section 12AA of the Act was available to the assessee trust for the year under consideration and as such corpus donations were liable to be included as income. Direction was issued to the Assessing officer to delete the addition treating the assessee as a registered trust with charitable objects. Hence the instant appeal by the appellant- revenue.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
Learned counsel for the appellant revenue submitted that the assessee was granted registration under Section 12AA w.e.f 1.4.2009 which would be operative for subsequent period whereas assessment was for the assessment year 2007-08 and therefore amount of ` 1.01 crores and ` 14 lacs totalling ` 1.15 crores was rightly taxed by the Assessing Officer.
Opposing the aforesaid contention, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee was entitled for benefit under section 10(23C) (iiiad) of the Act as the annual receipts were below ` one crore i.e. the amount prescribed under the Act and the rules. It was urged that the amount of gift of land valuing ` 1.01 crores would not be included in the annual receipts and therefore, taxable income shown at nil was correct.
The Tribunal while accepting the plea of the assessee recorded that the assessee was running three educational institutions. It had received donation of agriculture land by a registered gift deed dated 4.12.2006 from Smt. Vasu Devi and three others. The lands were valued at ` 1.01 crore. The assessee further received corpus donation of ` 15 lacs from three concerns. The registration under section 12AA of the Act had been granted to the assessee by the CIT w.e.f 1.4.2009 which was before the date of the assessment order passed on 30.12.2011 though obtaining registration under Section 12AA of the Act was not mandatory for claiming exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act. According to this provision, any income received by any person on behalf of any university or other educational institution existing solely for educational purposes and not for the purpose of profit is exempt if the aggregate annual receipt of such university or educational institute does not exceed the amount of annual receipt as may be prescribed. After examining the matter, the Tribunal concluded that the objects of the assessee trust being charitable had not been objected nor it was the case of the revenue that the donation in the shape of land or amount had been utilised for any other purposes except on the objects of the assessee trust. Of course, no educational activity had been started by the assessee during the year but at the same time, this fact had not been doubted that the assets and funds received by it in donation were meant for achieving its objects. Thus, the Tribunal rightly while setting aside the orders of the authorities below directed the Assessing officer to delete the addition treating the assessee as registered trust with charitable objects. The relevant findings recorded by the Tribunal read thus:- “6. In support of the grounds, the learned AR submitted that the first reason on the basis of the authorities below having denied the assessee’s exemption under section 11 is that its application for registration under section 12AA was rejected by the learned CIT. In this regard, the learned AR submitted that the matter was travelled upto the ITAT and registration under section 12AA was granted to the assessee by the learned CIT w.e.f 1.4.2009 while complying the direction of the ITAT. The learned AR submitted that the registration was granted well before the passing of the assessment order on 30.12.2011. He submitted further that the Finance (No.2) Bill 2014 proposed to allow benefit of availing exemption under section 11 and section 12AA to a trust or institution which has been granted registration subsequently in respect of preceding assessment years, the proceedings which are pending before the Assessing officer as on the date of such registration. The only condition is that the objects and activities of such trust or institution should be same on the basis of which such registration has been granted. It has been further provided that no action for reopening of assessment proceedings under section 147 shall be taken by the Assessing Officer in the case of such trust or institution merely on the ground that such trust or institution has not obtained registration for the said assessment year.
The second issue on the basis of which the exemption has not been granted by the authorities below is that exemption under section 10(23C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot be granted to the assessee as no educational institution of the assessee trust has come into existence during the year. Learned AR submitted which is evident from the material made available on record that the assessee is a trust with object to do educational activities only. This is the first year of its coming into existence. It has got land donated and as such it is in the process of starting educational trust. Learned AR referred copies of acknowledgement of return, balance sheet, profit and loss account, corpus funds account, property account, cash book, bank account, bank commission account, bank interest account, trust deed dated 2.6.2006, requisite for amendment in trust deed, amended trust deed dated 23.12.2009, gift deed dated 4.12.2006, order dated 29.2.2012 of the ITAT directing the learned CIT(Appeals) to grant registration, order dated 5.6.2012 of the learned CIT granting registration under section 12AA and order under section 10(23C)(vi) dated 24.9.2012 granting approval, made available at page Nos. 1 to 77 of the paper book. Learned AR also placed reliance on the following decisions:- i) Nitya Education Society vs. JCIT (2012) 51 SOT 103; ii) CIT vs.Doon Foundation 154 ITR 208 (Cal.); iii) Param Hans Swami Uma Bharti Mision vs. ACIT (2013) – 140 ITD 429 (Del.);
The learned senior DR on the other hand tried to justify the first appellate order with the submission that undisputedly the trust had not commenced any activities for establishing the educational institution during the year under consideration and no registration under section 12AA was available to the assessee trust for the year under consideration and as such the corpus donations are liable to be included as income.
Considering the above submission, we find from the first appellate order that the assessee is running three educational institutions namely Shanti Devi Law College, Shanti Devi School of Nursing and (iii) Shanti Devi Institute of Management and Technology. It had received donation of agriculture land by a registered gift deed dated 4.12.2006 from Smt. Vasu Devi and three others measuring 202 kanals and 3 marls. The lands were valued at ` 1.01 crore as per official circular rate of ` 4 lacs per killa and stamp duty and registration expenses of ` 3.10 lacs were born by the trust. The trust made entries in its books of account crediting the corpus fund and debiting the loan account with the notional value of land at ` 1 crore. The assessee further received corpus donation of ` 15 lacs from three concerns. During the year under consideration, the only receipt of trust was of ` 5450/- from bank interest and there was net loss of ` 2100/-. There are school receipts did not exceed ` 1 crore. In the case of CIT vs. Doon Foundation (supra), it has been held that if the assessee had taken steps towards the running of a full fledged teaching course then it would be construed that educational institution had been established and it will be entitled for exemption. In the present case before us, objects of the assessee trust being charitable have not been objected nor has it been a case of the revenue that the donation in the shape of land or amount have been utilized for any other purposes except on the objects of the assessee trust. Of course, no educational institution has been started by the assessee during year but at the same time, this fact has not been doubted or denied that assets and funds received by it in donation were meant for achieving its objects. Under these facts and circumstances in totality, we are of the view that the learned CIT(Appeals) was not justified in upholding the action of the Assessing officer on the basis that no registration under section 12AA of the Act was available to the assessee trust for the year under consideration and as such corpus donation are liable to be included as income. We thus while setting aside the orders of the authorities below in this regard direct the AO to delete the addition treating the assessee as registered trust with charitable objects. The ground Nos. 3 to 5 involving the issue are thus decided in favour of the assessee and are allowed as such. The ground No.1 is general in nature and the issue raised in ground No.2 questioning the validity of initiation of the proceedings under section 147 of the Act has become infructuous in view of the finding on the main issue raised in ground Nos. 3 to 5 of the appeal.”
The findings of fact recorded by the Tribunal have not been shown to be illegal or perverse by the learned counsel for the appellant- revenue warranting interference by this Court. Further, identical issue has already been decided against the revenue by the Madras High Court in The Commissioner of income Tax vs. Madrasa E-Bakhiyath-Us-Salihath ‘gs’
Judge
Whether reasoned/speaking order
Yes/No Whether reportable
Yes
More judgments on Section 12AA
- Yashaswi Academy for Skills, Pune vs PCIT (Central), PuneITA 2448/PUN/2026[NA]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026
- Yashaswi Academy for Skills, Pune vs PCIT (Central), PuneITA 2447/PUN/2026[NA]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026
- Sri Jawahar Education Trust, Chamarajanagar vs The Income Tax Officer Ward 1…ITA 1735/BANG/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed5 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Punjab Urban Planning and Development… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(1), MohaliITA 636/CHANDI/2024[2021-22]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Punjab Urban Planning and Development… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle…ITA 635/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax vs. Kaushlendra KumarPatna · 27 Oct 2026
- Ayush Sureshchandra Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026