ABM SENIOR SECONDARY PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY, PALAMPUR,PALAMPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS) WARD, SOLAN, SOLAN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 467/CHANDI/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 September 2025AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee, being a society engaged in educational activity with gross receipts not exceeding One Crore rupees, was entitled to total exemption under Section 10(23)(iii)(d) of the Act. The AO was not empowered to invoke Section 11(5) or raise the issue.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a school society, filed a 'nil' income return. The AO made an addition of Rs. 59,50,000/- on account of interest-free rent advance given to specified persons. The CIT(A) partly deleted the addition, confirming Rs. 38,86,000/-.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee society is eligible for exemption under Section 10(23)(iii)(d) and whether the AO was justified in making additions related to interest-free advances.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(2),Section 10(23)(iii)(d),Section 11(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH

Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A
For Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr.DR
Hearing: 02.09.2025Pronounced: 10.09.2025

O R D E R PER RAJ PAL YADAV, VP

The assessee is in appeal against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 28.02.2025 passed for assessment year 2015-16.

2.

With the assistance of ld. Representative, we have gone through the record carefully. It emerges out from the record that assessee has filed its return of income on 24.08.2015 A.Y.2015-16 2 declaring ‘nil’ income. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment and a notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued. According to the AO, a perusal of the record would reveal that assessee has given interest free rent advance to specified persons amounting to Rs.59,50,000/-. Hence, he was of the view that this advance rent ought to have not been given by the assessee and the Faceless Assessment Unit made an addition of Rs.59,50,000/-.

3.

On appeal, CIT (Appeals) has deleted the addition to the extent of Rs.20,64,000/- and confirmed the addition of the balance amount i.e. Rs.38,86,000/-.

4.

A perusal of the record would reveal that assessee is a Society engaged in educational activity. It is running a school upto 12th standard affiliated to Himachal Pradesh Board of School Education. Its gross receipts did not exceed One Crore of rupees and therefore, it is entitled for total exemption u/s 10(23)(iii)(d) of the Act. The AO was not empowered to invoke Section 11(5) or rake up this issue. Had the assessee crossed threshold limit of Rs.One Crore, then these aspects are to be looked into. The CIT (Appeals) has erred in A.Y.2015-16 3 confirming the part addition. Accordingly, we allow the appeal of the assessee and delete the additions made by the AO as well as partly confirmed by the ld. CIT (Appeals).

5.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced on 10.09.2025.

More judgments on Section 11(5)

All 401 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11(5) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →