DCIT, EXEMPTION , GHAZIABAD vs. MAHARANA PRATAP EDUCATION CENTRE , KANPUR
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH “F”NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRIPAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBERAND
SHRIBRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2840/Del/2018
नधा रणवष /Assessment Year:2013-14
DCIT, Exemption,
Room No.105, CGO Complex-II,
1st Floor, Kamla Nehru Nagar,
Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh.
बनाम
Vs.
MAHARANA PRATAP
EDUCATION CENTRE,
117/Q/66, Sharda Nagar,
Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh.
PAN No.AABTM5254T
अपीलाथ Appellant
यथ/Respondent
Assessee by Shri G.C. Srivastava, Advocate &
Shri Kalrav Malhotra, Advocate
Revenue by Ms. Monika Singh, CIT DR
सुनवाईकतार ख/ Date of hearing:
24.11.2025
उघोषणाकतार ख/Pronouncement on 28.11.2025
Order Under Section 254(1) of Income Tax Act
PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)-
II, Kanpur dated 23.01.2018 for the AY 2013-14 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act.
The Revenue has raised the following grounds:
(1)
“The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in deleting the additions of Rs.83,019/- was made by the AO in respect of expenses on account of donation and charity which were not explained during the assessment proceedings by the assessee.
(2)
The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in deleting the addition of Rs.13,29,51,361/- on account of extraordinary expenditure on advertisement which were not explained during the assessment proceedings by the assessee.
(3)
The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in deleting the addition of Rs.3,53,07,414/- in respect of royalty as the expenditure is not charitable within the meaning of section 13(3) of the I.T. Act.
MAHARANA PRATAP EDUCATION CENTRE
(4)
The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in deleting the addition of Rs.1,23,90,343/- in respect of depreciation on branding as the provision of section 13(1)(c) & 13(3) of I.T. Act are applicable.
(5)
The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in deleting the addition of Rs.29,73,567/- in respect of curriculum development charges as the provision of section 13(1)(c) & 13(3) of I.T. Act are applicable.
(6)
The Ld. CIT(A) has erred inlaw and facts in deleting the addition of Rs.2,69,69,137/- in respect of disallowance was made on specific expenses as the payment made to the persons is in violation of provisions of section 13(1)(c) of the I.T. Act.
(7)
The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in deleting the addition of Rs.4,19,47,464/- in respect of hostel activities as this activity is found to be commercial in nature.
(8)
The order of Ld. CIT(A) be cancelled and the order of the AO be restored.”
2. Brief facts are that the assessee is an Educational Institution filed his return of income for AY 2013-14 declaring nill income. The case was selected for scrutiny; assessment was assessment was completed on 30.03.2016. The Assessing Officer (AO) while passing the assessment order treated the assessee as Association of Person (AOP) besides other additions made various additions/ disallowances including the following additions:
S.NO.
AMOUNT
NATURE OF ADDITION/DISALLOWANCE
A)
Rs.83,019
Donation & Charity b)
Rs.45,33,570
Interest on TDS claimed by the assessee (not an issue in this appeal) c)
Rs.13,29,51,361
Disallowances of ‘Advertisement Expenses’
d)
Rs.3,53,07,414
Disallowance of ‘Royalty Expenses’
e)
Rs.1,23,90,343
Disallowances out of depreciation of ‘Branding’
f)
Rs.29,73,567
Disallowances made out of depreciation on ‘Curriculum’
g)
Rs.2,69,69,137
Disallowed 20%of various expenditure amounting to Rs.13,48,45,686.00 claimed under the head
A) Charges for accommodation facility
Rs.1,00,52,781/-
B) Charges for overseeing admission process
Rs.8,82,60,000/- h)
Rs.4,19,47,464
Addition out of net of ‘Hostel Fees Received’
i)
Rs.22,41,653
Addition on the ‘Interest on Loans and advances’.
MAHARANA PRATAP EDUCATION CENTRE
Aggrieved by the addition/ disallowances in the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), wherein all the aforesaid additions/ disallowances were deleted. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A) the Revenue has filed present appeal before this Tribunal. 4. We have heard the submissions of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax & Departmental Representative (CIT DR) for the Revenue and the Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) for the assessee. 5. Ground no.1 relates to deleting the disallowance of donation of Rs.83,019/-. The facts relating to the addition is that during assessment the Assessing Officer (AO) recorded that assessee in its computation of total income claimed expenses of Rs.83,019/- on account of donation and charity. The AO further recorded that during assessment the assessee has not explained justification of donation and disallowed such claim. On appeal before Ld. CIT(A) the assessee submitted that AO has not considered real facts and made the addition/disallowance which is not justified being arbitrary. Complete details including books were produced before the AO, which were not seen by him. The amount has been charged to receipts and payments accountand rebate and concession on fees to those students having poor financial background. Details of which were furnished before AO during the assessment. The Ld.CIT(A) after considering the submission of assessee recorded that he perused the reply of the assessee and other details furnished during assessment before AO. The ld. CIT(A) recorded that for allowability of expenditure, it should have been incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of assessee-trust. The assessee has given MAHARANA PRATAP EDUCATION CENTRE donation in furtherance of their object. Since there is no evidence on record that donation/alleged rebate was not given in furtherance of object, it was allowable. On the basis of such finding such the Ld. CIT(A) allowed full relief to the assessee. Hence, revenue is appeal. 6. The Ld. CIT-DR for the revenue submits that assessee has not provided required details. The Ld. CIT(A) allowed relief to the assessee on the basis of submission of assessee.The Ld. CIT DR prayed for restoring the addition made by the AO. 7. On the other hand, the Ld. AR of the assessee submits that before making submission on merit, he would like to bring certain fact on record. By referring para 2 & 3 of assessment order, the Ld. AR of the assessee submits that assessee trust/society was set up in 1995. Object of the society is to run educational institution, which is not in dispute. The assessee is registered with