XR EDUCTIONAL TRUST,SALEM vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD, SALEM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3267/CHNY/2019Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 November 2021AY 2016-173 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the matter to the Assessing Officer to examine the assessee's claim for exemption under Section 10(23C)(iiiad) as an educational institution. The assessee was given an opportunity to substantiate its claim.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a trust, claimed exemption under Section 10(23C)(v) for AY 2016-17. However, its activities involved conducting quiz competitions with receipts from advertisement and sponsorship, and it was not registered under Section 12A.

What were the issues?

Whether the trust's activities qualified for exemption under Section 10(23C)(v) or (iiiad), and whether the AO had properly examined the claim under the latter section.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10(23C)(v),Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

For Appellant: Shri S.Sridhar, Advocate, Shri AR.V.Sreenivasan – Ld. Addl. CIT
For Respondent: Shri AR.V.Sreenivasan – Ld. Addl. CIT

आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Salem, [CIT(A)] dated 24/10/2019 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) u/s.143(3) of the Act on 24/12/2018. 2. The material facts are that the assessee being a Trust claimed exemption u/s 10(23C)(v) as applicable to a trust in the return of income. However, upon perusal of its activities, it transpired that the assessee was engaged in conducting quiz competition as per State Government order. The assessee’s receipts were in the nature of advertisement and promoter’s contribution. The assessee received sponsorship of Rs.15 Lacs from Kalasalingam University to display advertisement banner and other background material at the time of conducting the quiz. It was also found that the assessee was not registered u/s.12A of the Act and therefore, the deduction as claimed by the assessee would not be available. The proceeds were in the nature of advertisement sponsorship and therefore, the assessee was engaged in commercial activities. Accordingly, the income was assessed at Rs.8.80 Lacs.

3.

During appellate proceedings, the assessee made an alternative plea to allow the claim u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) as applicable to an educational institution. However, the same was rejected by Ld. CIT(A) with the observations that the assessee was not engaged in any educational activities. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

4.

Before us, the only plea raised by Ld. AR is that Ld. AO did not examine the claim in terms of Sec.10(23C)(iiiad) and therefore, for the said limited purpose, the matter be restored back to the Ld. AO. Though Ld. DR opposed the same, however, considering the factual matrix, the bench deem it fit to grant another opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its claim in terms of Sec. 10(23C)(iiiad). For the said limited purpose, the matter stand restored back to Ld. AO. The Ld.AO is directed to examine the assessee’s claim in terms of 10(23C)(iiiad) after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard.

5.

The appeal stand partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 3rd November, 2021 Sd/- Sd/- (Mahavir Singh) (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) उपा�� / Vice President लेखा सद� / Accountant Member चे>ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated : 03/11/2021 DS आदेशकी4ितिलिपअ6ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ./ The Appellant 1. 12थ./ The Respondent 2. आयकरआयुE(अपील) / The CIT(A) 3. आयकरआयुE/ CIT– concerned 4. िवभागीय1ितिनिध, आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, चे>ई / DR, ITAT, Chennai 5. गाडJफाईल / Guard File 6.

More judgments on Section 10(23C)(v)

All 37 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10(23C)(v) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →