TAMILNADU SMALL AND TINY INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD 4, CHENNAI

The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under:

1. “1. For that the order of Commissioner of income Tax (Appeals) is contrary to law, facts and circumstances of the case to the extent prejudicial to the interest of the appellant and at any rate is opposed to the principles of equity, natural justice and fair play.

Grounds No.2 to 7 are relating to denial of exemption u/s. 11 of the Act invoking the provisio of section 2(15) and section 13(8) of income tax.

The assessee is an association registered u/s. 12AA of the Act and filed return of income admitting total income as Nil. The A.O invoking provisions of Section 2(15) of the Act has held that the assessee is engaged in carrying on of activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business or an activity of rendering services in relation to trade, commerce or business for a cess, fee or any other consideration and the gross receipt exceeds Rs. 25 Lakhs therefore, not eligible for exemption u/s. 11 or 12 of the Act. The A.O has accordingly considered excess income over expenditure of Rs. 9,75,944/- for the purpose of computation of taxable income. The Ld. Addl. CIT(A) has confirmed the finding of A.O.

The Ld. Authorized Representative (A.R) of the assessee before us has contended that the assessee is charitable association involved in charitable activity without any profit motive therefore proviso to section 2(15) of the Act cannot be invoked. The Ld. AR has further stated that it has conducted a skill development course for which programme fee of Rs. 23,40,000/- has been charged for which :- 4 -:

The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), on the other hand, has relied on the orders of lower authorities and argued that the activities of assessee are clearly in the nature of trade and therefore, provisions of Section 2(15) of the Act is clearly applicable and assessee is not eligible for benefit u/s 11 or 12 of the Act.

We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. The assessee is an association registered u/s. 12AA of the Act and set up with the objective to promote and protect small scale industries in the State of Tamil Nadu. The main activity conducted by the assessee was attending to workshops, seminars, conferences and other events by the group of the association to benefit small and micro industries. The assessee during the year has shown gross receipts of Rs. 88,71,510 including receipt from subscription fees, admission fees, membership fees, programme fees, rental income and interest income. The total expenditure incurred is Rs. 78,95,566/- and the excess of income over expenditure is Rs. 9,75,944/-. The A.O has held that the activity of the assessee during the year are in the nature of trade, commerce or business since, the object of the assessee-society are of general public utility and the gross receipt exceeds Rs. 25,00,000/-. The A.O therefore, invoking the proviso to section 2(15) has denied exemption u/s. 11 or 12 of the Act. The A.O has noted that the gross receipt considered to be in nature of trade, commerce and business amounts of Rs. 57,72,260/- which includes fee for advertisement and publication amounting to Rs. 34,32,260/- and programme receipt amount of Rs. 23,40,000/-. The Ld. AR has contended that the only activity which can be considered :- 6 -: trade, commerce or business is the programme receipt which is receipt for conducting skill development programme on cost basis. The Ld. AR has further submitted that the assessee has received Rs. 23,40,000/- from Tamil Nadu Skill Development Corporation for imparting training in engineering skill to 200 candidates. The Ld. AR has also submitted that it has paid Rs. 20,15,000/- against the above receipt to conduct the training programme. Therefore, the activity is on cost to cost basis or nominally above cost. The Ld. AR has relied on the orders of ITAT, Kolkata in the case of Indian Chamber of Commerce v. DCIT (Exemption), supra, and order of ITAT, Indore Aarambh Foundation v.

Ground No.8 is relating to disallowance of depreciation of Rs. 4,53,727/- on the ground that the assessee has already claimed the cost price of capital asset as application in earlier years.

The assessee has claimed depreciation of Rs. 4,60,972/- and the same has been disallowed by the A.O on the ground that the assessee has already claimed the cost price of the capital asset in earlier years as the application of income in the earlier assessment year. The dispute whether depreciation is to be allowed, has been settled by insertion of Section 11(6) in the Income-tax Act w.e.f AY 2015-16 that no deduction of depreciation is allowed in respect of any asset , acquisition of which has been claimed as an application . In view of the above, the assessee is not entitled for deprecation and there is no infirmity in the order of Ld. CIT(A). Thus, this ground of appeal is dismissed.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed.