No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC-3”, NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU
Assessee has filed these Appeals against the separate Orders dated
25.1.2016 and 23.1.2015 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax
(Appeals)—2, Gurgaon pertaining to assessment year 2011-12 & 2010-11.
The grounds raised by the assessee in ITA NO. 1824/Del/2016 (AY
2011-12) read as under:-
On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order
passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)
[CIT(A)] is bad both in the eye of law and on facts.
On the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A)
has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the
addition of Rs. 44,54,602/- made by the learned AO.
On the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A)
has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the action
of A.O. in denying the exemption under section 11 of the
Income Tax Act while computing its income ignoring the
fact that the assessee-society is an educational institution
and registered under section 12AA of the Income Tax Act
and the society was holding the property/assets wholly for
charitable purposes.
On the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A)
has erred both on facts and in law in not appreciating the
provision of Section 11 of the Act whereby exemption is to
be provided to the extent which income of the charitable
trust is applied to charitable or religious purposes in India.
On the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT
(A) has erred both on facts and in law in not appreciating
the fact that the income U/s 11 (1) refers. to the income
from property held under the trust and which has to be
applied for charitable purposes irrespective of the head of
income under which the income is assessable.
On the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT
(A) has erred both on facts and in law in ignoring the
various judicial pronouncements in this regard.
That the CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in
confirming the findings of the learned AO ignoring the
explanation and evidences submitted by the assessee in
support of its contention.
That the appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any
of the grounds of appeal.
The grounds raised by the assessee in ITA NO. 2025/Del/2015 (AY
2010-11) read as under:-
That the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) is bad in law and on
facts of the case.
That the ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining that the assessee is
not carrying education activity in this premises.
That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the receipt of Rs.
97,90,257/- as income from house property and taxed
under the head income from house property.
That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining that there is no
application / utilization of expenses against the receipt for
the purpose of charitable activity u/s. 2(15) of the Income
Tax Act, 1961.
That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the interest
charged u/s. 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the Income
tax Act.
Prayer:-
It is therefore, prayed that the disallowance / additions
sustained as above by Ld. CIT(A) be deleted and appeal be
allowed.
ITA NO. 1824/DEL/2016 (AY 2011-12)
The brief facts of the case are that assessee filed the return of income
on 01.08.2011 declaring total income of Rs. NIL. The case was selected for
scrutiny under the compulsory clause of Central Action Plan 2012. Notice
under section 143(2) was issued on 26.9.2012. After change of jurisdiction,
the notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) alongwith a questionnaire was
issued on 12.8.2013. In response thereto, assessee’s AR appeared and
filed the reply. AO observed that the society has made an agreement with
M/s Mothers Pride Personal Ltd. to establish a pre-school learning centre/
nursery school. As per the agreement with the assessee and the said
company, premise will be made available free of charges during the
subsistence of the agreement. In consideration of the above assessee is
entitled to 20% of the entire collection which includes registration charges,
admission charges, annual charges, quarterly charges, monthly fees, hobby
classes and charges of all the activities conducted in the school except
transport and refundable security. AO during the assessment proceedings
considered the amount received from Mothers Pride Persona Limited of Rs.
51,55,453/- as Income under the head house property and allowed statutory
deduction under section 24 of Rs. 15,46,359/- of the Income Tax Act.
Further addition of Rs. 12,676/- on account of interest income, Income from
IT Refund Interest of Rs. 37,382/- and miscellaneous income of Rs.
7,95,450/-received as voluntary donations. Total addition of Rs. 44,54,602/-
was made to the returned income of the assessee. Thereafter, the AO
completed the assessment at Rs. 44,54,602/- by making various additions
vide his order dated 29.3.2014 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Against the assessment order dated 29.3.2014, assessee
appealed before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide his impugned order dated
25.1.2016 has dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
Aggrieved with the aforesaid order of the Ld. CIT(A), assessee is in
appeal before the Tribunal.
During the hearing, Ld. Counsel of the assessee has stated that in the
present case the assesse purchased and constructed the property after
taking term loan from the bank and made the agreement with the Mother
Pride Education Persona P Ltd. in respect of rental income. There is no case
of any transfer of funds to the members of the society. He further stated
that the rental income from the property is in the charitable objects of the
Trust as mentioned in the Clause z aa) of the Memorandum of Association.
He relied upon the order of the Chennai Bench in the case of Anjuman-E-
Himayath-E-Islam (2015) 154 ITD 755. He further stated that in respect of
interest expenses of Rs. 24,25,411/- it has been paid on term loan taken to
acquire/ construction of assets of the society. He further stated that
assessee has also made the repayment of loan to the tune of Rs.
29,51,584/- and depreciation of Rs. 32,31,728/- are the application of
income for charitable purposes. He relied upon the order of the Hon’ble
Madras High Court in the case of DIT(E) vs. GovinduNaicker Estate (2009)
315 ITR 237 (Madras). It was the further contention that expenditure 6
incurred on blood donation camps, free books distribution are purely
charitable in nature and therefore, to be considered of application of income.
Administrative expenses are basically includes printing and stationery,
conveyance expenses, office maintenance expenses which are necessary for
running office of the trust. Therefore, he finally stated that this is not the
case of the AO that the assessee has made any business of sale or purchase
of property. There is no allegation that activities are not charitable in nature.
In view of the above, he requested that addition in dispute may be deleted.
On the contrary, Ld. DR opposed the aforesaid contention of the Ld.
Counsel of the assessee and relied upon the orders of the authorities below
and requested that the same may be upheld.
I have heard both the parties and perused the relevant records
available with me, especially the orders passed by the revenue authorities
and the case laws cited by the Ld. Counsel of the Assessee. In this case the
assessee is a society registered under Societies Registration Act 1860 and
registered under 12AA of the Income Tax Act. Assessee filed the Income tax
return for the A.Y. 2011-12 on 01.08.2011 declaring total income of Rs. Nil
along with copy of Audit Report, Balance sheet and Income & Expenditure
Alc. It has been noticed that during the year under consideration the
assessee had an agreement with M/s Mothers Pride Education Persona
Limited to establish a pre-school learning center nursery school. As per the
agreement with the assessee and the said company, premises will be made
available free of charge during the subsistence of the agreement. In
consideration of the above assessee is entitled to 20% of the entire
collection which includes registration charges, admission charges, annual
charges, quarterly charges, monthly fees, hobby classes and charges of all
the activities conducted in the school except transport and refundable
security. During the assessment proceedings the amount received from
Mothers Pride Persona Limited of Rs. 51,55,453/- as Income under the head
house property and allowed statutory deduction under section 24 of
Rs. 15,46,359/- of the Income Tax Act. Further addition of Rs. 12,676/- on
account of interest income, Income from IT Refund Interest of Rs. 37,382/-
and miscellaneous income of Rs. 7,95,450/- received as voluntary donations.
Total addition of Rs. 44,54,602/- was made to the returned income of the
assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the AO assessee preferred an appeal
before the Ld.CIT(A) who rejected the contention raised by the assessee
that the interest paid by the assessee for raising the loan for construction of
the property, repayment of loan, are application of income and therefore
assessee in total has applied Rs. 69,71,358/- which is far more than the
receipts and confirmed the addition made by the AO. I find that AO has
passed two pages order and has made only one action treating the income
received from the Mothers Pride Education Persona P Ltd as income under
the head house property. However, while computing the total assessed
income added the interest income of Rs. 12676/-, Rs. 37382/- on account of
interest on refund and Rs. 7,95,450/- as miscellaneous income which is the
amount received as voluntary donation without giving any justification for
the same. I further find that AO has accepted the application of funds made
by the assessee and he did not make any adverse comment on the activities
rendered by the assessee. In the present case, assessee purchased and
constructed the property after taking term loan from the bank and made the
agreement with the Mothers Pride Education Persona P Ltd in respect of
rental income. There is no case of any transfer of funds to the members of
the society. Further, rental income from the property is in the charitable
objects of the trust as mentioned in the (clause z aa) of the Memorandum of
Association. For the sake of ready reference the relevant clause of the
Memorandum of Association reads as under:-
“z aa) Without prejudice to the generality of the above objects
and for effectively carrying out the same, the society shall have
power to receive, hold and posses any property including
securities of any kind and to construct and maintained any
building and to enter into any contract for or in connection with
the purpose of the society to raise funds by creating charge
over the assets of the society or otherwise for the benefit of the
society and to accept the management of any trust or
endowment in which the society may be interested.” 9
9.1 My aforesaid view is fully supported by the ITAT, Chennai Bench
decision in the case of Anjuman-E-Himayath-E-lslam[2015] 154 ITO 755
(Chennai - Trib.) While determining 'income' of assessee-trust and its
'application of income' for purpose of claiming exemption under section 11
(1)(a), provisions of Chapter-IV i.e. sections 22 to 27 applicable for
computing income chargeable to tax under head 'income from house
property', will not be attracted. For the sake of convenience, the Relevant
extract of the order is reproduced hereunder:
"6.3 We have heard both the parties and carefully perused the
materials available on record. Chapter-III refers to "income
which does not form part of total income". Section-11 of the Act
placed under Chapter-III deals with 'income from property held
for charitable or religious purpose'. Section- 11 (1 )(a) provides
that income derived from the property held under trust wholly
for charitable or religious purpose, to the extent to which such
income is applied, shall not be included in its total income. The
Act also provides that upto 15% of the gross income received is
accumulated and then the same shall also be exempt from the
income of the trust. From the above it is clear that provision of
the Act in Chapter-III deals with the manner in which the income
of the assessee trust has to be applied in order to exempt such
income from the total income. It is not a case of computation of 10
income chargeable to tax as per the provisions Chapter IV under
the head "C-Income from house property". Therefore while
determining the "income" of the assessee trust and its
"application of income" for the purpose of claiming exemption
u/s. 11(1 )(a) of the Act, the provisions of Chapter-IV - Sections
22 to 27 of the Act which is applicable for computing the income
chargeable to tax under the head 'income from house property'
will not be attracted. However, provisions of sections 22 to 27 of
the Act will come into play when the assessee is not entitled to
the benefit of Section-11(1)(a) of the Act and when such income
of the Trust is chargeable to tax under the head "income from
house property". It is pertinent to mention here that Hon'ble
Calcutta High Court supra has held that income contemplated by
the provisions of section 11 is the real income and not the
income as assessed or assessable. Accordingly, while arriving at
the rental income of the assessee-trust any expenditure incurred
whatsoever related to the rental income has to be allowed as
deduction and the net income which is the real income, will be
treated as the income of the Trust. From our above discussion
the ground raised by the assessee on this issue will not survive
and therefore, the order of the Revenue is upheld. "
9.2 Further a perusal of income & expenditure and CIT(A) order at page
no. 6 shows that application made by the assessee is towards the charitable
activities and as per the objects of the society. The Break up of application
of Rs. 69,71,358 is as under:
i. Administrative Expenses Rs. 3,48,145/-
ii. Interest & Bank charges Rs.24,25,411/-
iii. Depreciation Rs. 32,31,728/-
iv. Maintenance expenses Rs.4,88,307/-
v. Blood Donation camp exp. Rs. 1,83,770/-
vi. Eye Check up camp exp. Rs. 1,54,149/-
vii. Free Books Distribution exp. Rs. 1,39,848/-
Rs. 69.71,358/-
9.3 ln respect of Interest expenses of Rs. 24,25,411/- it has been paid on
term loan taken to acquire/construction of assets of the society. Further,
assessee has also made the repayment of loan to the tune of Rs. 29,51,584
and depreciation of Rs. 32,31,728/- are the application of income for
charitable purposes. In this regard, reliance is placed on the judgement of
the Madras High Court in the case of DIT(E) vs GovinduNaicker Estate[2009]
315 ITR 237 (Madras) wherein it has been held as under:
“9. In the case on hand, it is an admitted fact that the
property of the assessee-trust was in a dilapidated
condition and would not earn income to carry out the
objects of the trust. For the purpose of carrying out the
objects of the trust, it has become necessary to demolish
and reconstruct the property so as to earn income by
exploiting the property. It is also an admitted fact that the
rental income in the property held in trust amounted to 90
per cent, of the total income of the trust. For the purpose
of putting up the construction of the property held in trust,
the trust borrowed fund from the Indian Bank. Thus, the
capital asset so put up by the borrowed fund is only for the
purpose of augmenting income in order to carry out the
object of the trust as envisaged. It is clear from the order
of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that neither
the Assessing Officer nor the assessee has adverted to the
object of the charitable trust. But the authorities
proceeded on the premise that the complex has been put
up by the trust in order to perform its charitable activities,
which factum has also not been disputed by the Revenue. 13
The assessee-trust in order to perform its charitable
activities, necessarily has to exploit the capital assets by
finding appropriate avenues for earning revenue and for
that purpose, has to incur expenditure, which is capital in
nature by raising loan. The capital asset built with a
borrowed fund generates income which enabled the
charitable trust to perform its charitable activities. Thus,
the capital asset built with borrowed fund, under no
circumstances, could be regarded to be outside the scope
of its objects. If it is within the objects of the charitable
trust, then there is no reason as to why the borrowing
made for the construction of the building and repayment of
the loan could not be treated as an application of income.
It is not the case of the Assessing Officer that the asses-
See by constructing the commercial complex contravened
the objects of the trust. There is no provision in the Act,
which disentitles the assessee-trust from claiming
repayment of loan as application of income, especially in
view of the fact that the trust has to augment its income
and for that purpose it has put up a construction with
borrowed fund. If raising of loan does not stand in the way
of its charitable activities, the repayment there after must
be treated as application of its income. By repayment of
the loan, the trust wiped its liability and the income earned
from the property would be available for being utilised for
charitable purposes.”
9.4 From the above, I noticed that Expenditure incurred on blood donation
camps, Free books distribution are purely charitable in nature and therefore
these are to be considered application of income. Administrative expenses
are basically includes printing & stationery, conveyance expenses, office
maintenance expenses which are necessary for running office of the trust. In
view of the above, it is not the case of the AO that the assessee has made
any business of sale or purchase of property. There is no allegation that
activities are not charitable in nature.
9.5 In the background of the aforesaid discussions and respectfully
following the precedents, as aforesaid, I delete the addition in dispute and
accordingly decide the issue in dispute in favour of the assessee and against
the Revenue. In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed.
ITA NO. 2025/DEL/2015 (AY 2010-11)
The brief facts of the case are that assessee filed the return of income
on 08.10.2010 declaring total income of Rs. NIL. The return of income was
processed u/s. 143(1) of the I.T. Act. The case was picked up for scrutiny.
Accordingly, notice u/s. 143(2) of the I.T. Act was issued on 23.9.2011 and
further statutory notice u/s. 142(1) alongwith questionnaire issued on
15.10.201. In response to the notice, assessee’s AR appeared and filed the
information, details and written submissions. AO observed that the society
has made an agreement with M/s Mothers Pride Personal Ltd. to establish a
pre-school learning centre/ nursery school. As per the agreement with the
assessee and the said company, premise will be made available free of
charges during the subsistence of the agreement. In consideration of the
above assessee is entitled to 20% of the entire collection which includes
registration charges, admission charges, annual charges, quarterly charges,
monthly fees, hobby classes and charges of all the activities conducted in
the school except transport and refundable security. AO during the
assessment proceedings considered the amount received from Mothers Pride
Persona Limited of Rs. 97,90,257/- as Income under the head house
property and allowed statutory deduction (@30%} of Rs. 29,37,077/- and
interest on borrowed capital of Rs. 33,94,280/- under section 24 of the
Income Tax Act. Further addition of Rs. 17,503/- on account of interest
income was also made by him. Total addition of Rs. 34,54,602/- was made
to the returned income of the assessee. Thereafter, the AO completed the
assessment at Rs. 34,76,403/- by denying the exemption u/s. 11 of the Act
claimed by the assessee, by making various additions vide his order dated 04.3.2013 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Against the assessment order dated 04.3.2013, assessee
appealed before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide his impugned order dated
23.1.2015 has dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
Aggrieved with the aforesaid order of the Ld. CIT(A), assessee is in
appeal before the Tribunal.
During the hearing, Ld. Counsel of the assessee has stated that in the
present case the assesse purchased and constructed the property after
taking term loan from the bank and made the agreement with the Mother
Pride Education Persona P Ltd. in respect of rental income. There is no case
of any transfer of funds to the members of the society. He further stated
that the rental income from the property is in the charitable objects of the
Trust as mentioned in the Clause z aa) of the Memorandum of Association.
He relied upon the order of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case
of Director of Income Tax (Exemption) vs. Span Foundation (2009) 17 DTR
283 (Del) and Hon’ble Uttarakhand High Court decision in the case of CIT
vs. Jyoti Prabha Soceity (2009) 310 ITR 162. He further stated that the
source from which the money is received is lease and license fee but its
application is for the purposes of charitable activities covered u/s. 2(15) of
the Act. in respect of interest expenses of Rs. 33,94,280/- it has been paid
on term loan taken to acquire/ construction of assets of the society. He
further stated that assessee has also made the repayment and depreciation 17
of Rs. 33,94,280/- are the application of income for charitable purposes. He
relied upon the order of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of DIT(E)
vs. GovinduNaicker Estate (2009) 315 ITR 237 (Madras). It was the further
contention that expenditure incurred on blood donation camps, free books
distribution and Eye check up Camp are purely charitable in nature and
therefore, to be considered of application of income. Therefore, he finally
stated that this is not the case of the AO that the assessee has made any
business of sale or purchase of property. There is no allegation that activities
are not charitable in nature. In view of the above, he requested that addition
in dispute may be deleted.
On the contrary, Ld. DR opposed the aforesaid contention of the Ld.
Counsel of the assessee and relied upon the orders of the authorities below
and requested that the same may be upheld.
I have heard both the parties and perused the relevant records
available with me, especially the orders passed by the revenue authorities
and the case laws cited by the Ld. Counsel of the Assessee. During the year
under consideration the assessee had an agreement with M/s Mothers Pride
Education Persona Limited to establish a pre- school learning center/ nursery
school. As per the agreement with the assessee and the said company,
premise will be made available free of charge during the subsistence of the
agreement. In consideration of the above assessee is entitled to 20% of the
entire collection which includes registration charges, admission charges,
annual charges, quarterly charges, monthly fees, hobby classes and charges
of all the activities conducted in the school except transport and refundable
security. AO during the assessment proceedings consider the amount
received from Mothers Pride Persona Limited of Rs. 97,90,257/- as Income
under the head house property and allowed statutory deduction (@30%} of
Rs. 29,37,077/- and interest on borrowed capital of Rs. 33,94,280/- under
section 24 of the Income Tax Act. Further addition of Rs. 17,503/- on
account of interest income was also made by him. Total addition of Rs.
34,54,602/- was made to the returned income of the assessee. The
assessee is not engaged in charitable activities and thus income is
assessable under the head income from house property. The AO has passed
the order and has treated the income received from the Mothers Pride
Education Persona P Ltd as income under the head house property.
However, while computing the total assessed income added the interest
income of Rs. 17,503/- , without giving any justification for the same. In
the present case, assessee purchased and constructed the property after
taking term loan from the bank and made the agreement with the Mothers
Pride Education Persona P Ltd in respect of rental income. There is no case
of any transfer of funds to the members of the society. Further, rental
income from the property is in the charitable objects of the trust as
mentioned in the clause (z aa) of the Memorandum of Association. Further a
perusal of income & expenditure shows that application made by the
assessee is towards the charitable activities and as per the objects of the
society. The issue is squarely covered in favour of assessee by the judgment
of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX
(EXEMPTION) Versus SPAN FOUNDATION [(2009) 17 DTR 283 (Del), (2009)
178 TAXMAN 436 (Del)] wherein Assessee trust having constructed a
building out of borrowed funds, application of rent derived from the said
building to repay the borrowed funds has to be treated as application of
income for charitable purposes and the assessee is entitled to benefits of ss.
11 and 12. Further Hon'ble Uttarakhand High Court in the case of
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus JYOTI PRABHA SOCIETY [2009]
310 ITR 162 (Uttarakhand) held as under;
"It is true that the activities of the respondent-society
includes letting out of the properties to the educational
institutions. Had the rental income earned by the
respondent-society not utilized for the educational
purposes it could have been said that the letting out of the
property on the part of the respondent-society has lost the
charitable purpose. But, in the present case, there is a
concurrent finding of fact on the part of the Commissioner
of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Income-tax Appellate
Tribunal that the rental income earned by the respondent-
society is being utilized again for the purposes of imparting
education by maintaining the buildings and constructing
new buildings for the same purpose. As such, we are of the
view that the charitable purpose is not lost and it cannot
be said that the assessee-respondent is not entitled to
exemption claimed by it under section 11 of the Act."
15.1 I find that in the case of assessee although the source from which the
money is received is lease & license fee but its application is for the
purposes of charitable activities covered u/s 2(15). Further, loan advances
by an educational trust to students for higher studies should be treated as
application of income for the charitable purpose. I further note that the
CBDT vide its Circular No. 100 [F.No. 195/1/72-IT(A-I), dated 24.1.1973]
has decided that repayment of the loan originally taken to fulfill one of the
objects of the trust will amount to an application of the income for charitable
purposes. As regards the loan advanced for higher studies. If the only object
of trust is to give interest bearing loans for higher studies, it will amount to
carrying on of money lending business. However, if the object of the trust is
advancement of education and granting of scholarship loans as only one of
the activities carried on for the fulfillment of the objectives of the trust,
granting of loan even interest bearing will amount to application of income 21
for charitable purposes. As and when the loan is returned to trust, it will be
treated as income of that year. I draw support from the decision of the
Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs Janmabhoomi Press
Trust [2000] 242 ITR 703 (Karn.) wherein it has been held that repayment
of loan for the construction of the building by the assessee for the purpose
of augmenting its fund shall qualify as income applied for charitable purpose.
The existing scheme of section 11 as well as section 10(23C) provides
exemption in respect of income when it is applied to acquire a capital asset.
Subsequently, while computing the income for purposes of these sections,
notional deduction by way of depreciation etc. is claimed and such amount of
notional deduction remains to be applied for charitable purpose. Break up of
application of Rs. 79,10,968/- is as under:
I. Administrative Expenses Rs. 3,95,692/-
ii. Interest & Bank Charges Rs. 33,94,2801-
III. Depreciation Rs. 36,55,891/-
IV. Blood Donation camp expenses Rs. 1,93,6701-
v. Eye Check up camp expenses Rs. 1,16,985/-
vi. Free Books Distribution Expenses Rs. 1,54,450/-
Rs. 79,10,968/- 22
15.2 ln respect of Interest expenses of Rs. 33,94,280/- it has been paid on
term loan taken to acquire/construction of assets of the society. Further,
assessee has also made the repayment of loan and depreciation of
Rs. 36,51,891/- are the application of income for charitable purposes. In this
regard, reliance is placed on the judgement of the Madras High Court in the
case of DIT{E) vs Govindu Naicker Estate [2009] 315 ITR 237 (Madras)
wherein it has been held as under:
“9. In the case on hand, it is an admitted fact that the
property of the assessee-trust was in a dilapidated
condition and would not earn income to carry out the
objects of the trust. For the purpose of carrying out the
objects of the trust, it has become necessary to demolish
and reconstruct the property so as to earn income by
exploiting the property. It is also an admitted fact that the
rental income in the property held in trust amounted to 90
per cent, of the total income of the trust. For the purpose
of putting up the construction of the property held in trust,
the trust borrowed fund from the Indian Bank. Thus, the
capital asset so put up by the borrowed fund is only for the
purpose of augmenting income in order to carry out the
object of the trust as envisaged. It is clear from the order
of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that neither 23
the Assessing Officer nor the assessee has adverted to the
object of the charitable trust. But the authorities
proceeded on the premise that the complex has been put
up by the trust in order to perform its charitable activities,
which factum has also not been disputed by the Revenue.
The assessee-trust in order to perform its charitable
activities, necessarily has to exploit the capital assets by
finding appropriate avenues for earning revenue and for
that purpose, has to incur expenditure, which is capital in
nature by raising loan. The capital asset built with a
borrowed fund generates income which enabled the
charitable trust to perform its charitable activities. Thus,
the capital asset built with borrowed fund, under no
circumstances, could be regarded to be outside the scope
of its objects. If it is within the objects of the charitable
trust, then there is no reason as to why the borrowing
made for the construction of the building and repayment of
the loan could not be treated as an application of income.
It is not the case of the Assessing Officer that the asses-
See by constructing the commercial complex contravened
the objects of the trust. There is no provision in the Act,
which disentitles the assessee-trust from claiming
repayment of loan as application of income, especially in
view of the fact that the trust has to augment its income
and for that purpose it has put up a construction with
borrowed fund. If raising of loan does not stand in the way
of its charitable activities, the repayment there after must
be treated as application of its income. By repayment of
the loan, the trust wiped its liability and the income'
earned from me property would be available for being
utilised for charitable purposes."
15.3 I further note that Depreciation has been held to be an application of
income in following judgments:
I. CIT Vs Tiny Tots Education Society [2011] 330 ITR 16 (P&H)
II. DIT Vs Vishwa Jagriti Mission [2013] 83 DTR 47 (Del).
III. CIT Vs Sheth Manilal Ranchhoddas Vishram Bhawan Trust [1992] 198 ITR 598 (Guj).
IV. CIT Vs Bharuka Public Welfare Trust [1999] 240 ITR 513 (Cal)
V. CIT Vs Institute of Banking Personnel Selection [2003] 264 ITR 110 (Bom.)
15.4 Further, expenditure incurred on Eye check up, blood donation camps,
Free books distribution are purely charitable in nature and therefore are to
be considered application of income. Administrative expenses are 25
basically includes printing & stationery, conveyance expenses, office
maintenance expenses and salary expenses which are necessary for running
office of the trust. In my view, this is not the case of the AO that the
assessee has made any business of sale or purchase of property. There is no
allegation that activities are not charitable in nature. In the background of
the aforesaid discussions and respectfully following the precedents, as
aforesaid, I delete the addition in dispute and accordingly decide the issue
in dispute in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. In the result,
the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed.
In result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 09/01/2017.
Sd/-
[H.S. SIDHU] JUDICIAL MEMBER Date: 09/01/2017 srb