DDIT (E) 1(1), MUMBAI vs. SRI SRI RADHA DAMODAR CHARTIBALE TRUST, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2461/MUM/2014Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 November 2016AY 2006-073 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, finding it fair and reasonable. The Tribunal relied on a previous decision in the assessee's own case for a different assessment year, which allowed exemption for running a restaurant as part of promoting vegetarianism.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order allowing exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act to a charitable trust. The trust ran a vegetarian restaurant, which the Revenue argued was a commercial activity not covered by its charitable objects.

What were the issues?

Whether running a restaurant by a charitable trust, as a means to promote vegetarianism, qualifies for exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11,Section 147,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI

For Appellant: Shri Manjunatha Swamy, CIT-DR
Hearing: 03.11.2016Pronounced: 03.11.2016

अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant by : Shri Manjunatha Swamy, CIT-DR प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Respondent by : Shri Nishant Thakkar and Ms. Jasmin Amalsadvala सुनवाई की तायीख / Date of Hearing : 03.11.2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date of Pronouncement : 03.11.2016 आदेश / O R D E R

PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM:

1.

This appeal filed by the Revenue on 11.4.2014 is against the order of the CIT (A)-1, Mumbai dated 18.2.2014 for the assessment year 2006-07. In this appeal, Revenue raised the following grounds which read as under:- “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT (A) has erred in directing the AO to allow the exemption u/s 11 of the Act without appreciating the fact that the assessee is running commercial or business activity viz a restaurant, which is generating huge profit, is open to outsiders, not engaged in distribution of food to poor and needy people as contemplated in its charitable objects, and can no way be construed as a charitable activity, ignoring the detailed findings on facts by the AO.

2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT (A) has erred in directing the AO to allow the exemption u/s 11 of the Act when the only charitable work carried out by the assessee is running a vegetarian restaurant and earning huge profit year after year and showing the expenses of running restaurant as expenses on the object of the trust.”

2. At the outset, Ld Counsel for the assessee briefly narrated the facts of the case and mentioned that in this case the assessment was completed u/s 148 r.w.s 147 of the Act, wherein the AO denied the exemption u/s 11 of the Act without appreciating the fact that the running of commercial business activity, a restaurant, as part of spreading the vegetarianism is the object of the assessee-Trust. Matter travelled to the first appellate authority and the CIT (A) granted relief relying on his

order for the AY 2008-09, details of which are given in paras 4.2 and 4.3 of his order. In this regard, Ld Counsel for the assessee read out the last lines of the said para 4.3 on page 9 of the CIT (A)‟s order and highlighted the following:-

More judgments on Section 11

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →