THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -EXEMPTION vs. FORTUNE SOCIETY FOR DEVELOPMENT AND PROMOTION OF INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS

PDF · subscribers
ITA/299/2018HC DelhiDLHC01034255201814 March 2018Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that no substantial question of law arises in the present appeal. The Court noted that the assessee society was set up to provide education and that the ITAT had ruled in favour of the assessee by relying on the High Court's previous decision in Deputy Director of Income Tax v. Indraprastha Cancer Society. Considering the object of the assessee society and the prior rulings of the Court, the High Court found no grounds to interfere with the ITAT's order. Consequently, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed. No specific issue was left undecided; the appeal was disposed of on the preliminary ground of no substantial question of law.

What were the facts?

The Revenue is appealing against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's (ITAT) decision to dismiss its appeal. The ITAT had ruled in favour of the assessee, a society established for the promotion of education. The core of the dispute concerns the permissibility of claiming exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The ITAT's decision was based on a previous ruling by the High Court in the case of Deputy Director of Income Tax v. Indraprastha Cancer Society. The High Court, in the present instance, is considering whether a substantial question of law arises from the ITAT's order.

What were the issues?

1. Does a substantial question of law arise concerning the permissibility of exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for a society established to provide education? Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the assessee. However, the ITAT's decision in favour of the assessee was based on reliance on the High Court's previous ruling in Deputy Director of Income Tax v. Indraprastha Cancer Society (ITA 240/2014 decided on 18.11.2014). Revenue's Contention: The Revenue is questioning the ITAT's dismissal of its appeal, implying disagreement with the ITAT's finding that the assessee is eligible for exemption under Section 11. The Revenue's appeal to the High Court is predicated on the belief that a substantial question of law arises.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~42 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ ITA 299/2018

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -EXEMPTION ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Puneet Rai with Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Advs.

versus

FORTUNE SOCIETY FOR DEVELOPMENT AND PROMOTION OF INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS ..... Respondent

Through: None.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

O R D E R %

14.03.2018

The Revenue questions the dismissal of its appeal on a question about the permissibility of exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter referred to as “the Act”) to the assessee as a society set up to provide education. The ITAT ruled in favour of the assessee by placing reliance on Deputy Director of Income Tax v. Indraprastha Cancer Society (ITA 240/2014 decided on 18.11.2014). In these circumstances, having regard to the object of the assessee society as well as the previous rulings of the Court, no question of law arises. The appeal is dismissed.

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J

MARCH 14, 2018/kks

A. K. CHAWLA, J

More judgments on Section 11

All 7,190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →