COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(E) vs. APPAREL EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL

PDF · subscribers
ITA/813/2016HC DelhiDLHC01219572201622 November 2016Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that no substantial question of law arose. It relied on previous judgments of the Court which ruled against the Revenue on similar issues regarding charitable organizations and depreciation claims.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT decision concerning an apparel export promotion council. The appeal raised questions about whether services rendered for a commercial purpose disqualified the organization from charitable status and if depreciation claimed was permissible.

What were the issues?

Whether services rendered for a commercial purpose negate charitable status and if depreciation can be claimed by a charitable organization.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11,Section 12

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

$~40 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +

ITA 813/2016, CM APP.43263 & 43264/2016

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E) ..... Appellant Through: Mr. P. Roychoudhuri, Sr. Standing Counsel with Ms. Vibhuti Malhotra, Jr. Standing Counsel.

versus

APPAREL EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL ..... Respondent

Through: None.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

O R D E R %

22.11.2016

1.

The questions of law sought to be urged by the Revenue in this appeal are:

(i) Whether the amounts received by the assessee could be sought to be excluded from the description of the charitable organisation since it involves rendering of services for commercial purpose? And

(ii) Whether the depreciation claimed by it could not have been granted?

2.

We notice that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has relied upon the rulings of this Court in India Trade Promotion Organisation vs Director General of Income Tax (2015) 371 ITR 333 and judgment dated 04.07.2013 in WP(C) 3147/2012, titled: The

Institute of Chartered Accountants of India and Anr. vs Director General of Income Tax (Exemptions), Delhi & Ors. No question of law, therefore, arises. 3. As far as second question urged with respect to permissibility of depreciation, here the Revenue urges that the grant of depreciation would result in a double benefit given that the assessee is a charitable organization and, therefore, beneficiary of all exemptions. In the judgment rendered by the Court in Director of Income Tax versus Vishwa Jagriti Mission (2013) 262 CTR 558 it was held that grant of depreciation does not result in a double or undue benefit. 4. Having regard to the fact that in both questions this Court has ruled against the Revenue, no substantial question of law arises. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J

NAJMI WAZIRI, J NOVEMBER 22, 2016 /vikas/

More judgments on Section 11

All 7,190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →