ADIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4177/DEL/2010Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 November 2015AY 2006-074 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 held that the issue was covered by its previous decisions in the assessee's own case. The Ld.CIT(A) had followed these binding decisions, and the Tribunal found no infirmity in the Ld.CIT(A)'s order.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Delhi Public School Society, earns service charges from satellite schools for using its name and logo. The Assessing Officer treated these receipts as business income, not incidental to the society's objects. The assessee had previously lost its exemption under Section 10(23C)(vi) but was registered under Section 12AA.

What were the issues?

Whether service charges received from satellite schools for using the DPS name and logo are taxable as business income or are incidental to the objects of the society. Whether the Ld.CIT(A) correctly followed previous ITAT decisions in the assessee's own case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10(23C)(vi),Section 11,Section 12,Section 12A,Section 12AA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “ H”, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY & SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA

For Appellant: Shri O.P. Meena, Sr. DR

PER J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

1.

Both these appeals are filed by the Revenue directed against the consolidated order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)-XXI, New Delhi dated 23.6.2010 pertaining to the A.Ys 2006-07 and 2007-08.

2.

Facts in brief:- The assessee is a Society and derives income from running of schools. It runs 17 schools in the name of Delhi Public School (DPS) by itself. Further more, it has granted permission to 90 Societies/Trusts spread across India to open schools in the name of DPS. Similarly permission is granted to 25 entities outside India, to open schools in the name of DPS. Thus DPS Schools are opened and run by other Society/Trusts, after obtaining permission from the assessee Society. These are called Satellite Schools. These Satellite Schools are bound by an agreement, to pays service charges for using the name, mottos and logos of DPS. The assessee earns service charges from the Satellite Schools for granting permission to use the above name, mottos and logo and exercising certain control in the overall educational operations of these Satellite Schools. These service charges are reflected as Society maintenance receipts, in the books of accounts of the assessee. The assessee is registered u/s 12A of the Act. It was also notified u/s 10(23)(C) of the Act by DGIT(Exemptions), Delhi vide Notification No.4/2005 dt. 19.5.2005. The DGIT(E) vide his order dt. 26.2.2009 rescinded the notification no.4/2005 dt. 19.5.2005 under which the assessee had been granted exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi). In view of the same, the benefit of exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) is no longer available to the assessee for A.Y. 2006-07. However, since the assesse has been granted registration u/s 12AA of the Act, the assessment for A.Y. 2006-07 has been carried out subject to the provisions of s.11 and 12 of the Act. In this regard, in the assessment order it has clearly been recorded that “In view of the fact that notification u/s 10(23C)(vi) of the Act is no longer available to the assessee in AY 2007-08. Therefore, the present assessment is being made subject to provisions of s.11/12 of the Act.” 2.1. The A.O. treated the society maintenance fees receipts as business income and not incidental to the attainment of the objects of the assessee society. He further stated that separate books of accounts have not been maintained, which is violative of provisions of s.11 and 12 of the Act. He held that the society maintenance fee, being in the name of franchisee income earned by the assessee was taxable. 2.2. Aggrieved the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the First Appellate Authority, who held that, similar issue has arisen in the assessee’s own case from the A.Y. 1998-99 onwards to the A.Y. 2005-06, and the ITAT, in various orders, as consistently upheld the orders of the Ld.CIT(A) and decided the issue in favour of the assessee.

3.

Aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before us on the following grounds .

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) ;has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.6,56,56,420/- made by the AO in respect of franchise fees received by the DPS Society from different satellite schools which are running under the name and logo of Delhi Public School (DPS) having different management than The DPS Society.

2. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any ground of appeal raised above at the time of hearing.”

4.

We have heard Shri O.P.Meena, Ld.Sr.D.R. on behalf of the Revenue and Shri Hiren Mehta, C.A. the Ld.Counsel for the assessee.

5.

The issue is covered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue by a series of decisions of the Tribunal in the assessee’s own case. The Ld.CIT(A) has followed the binding decisions of the ITAT in the assessee’s own case for the A.Y. 1998-99, 1999-2000, 2001-02, 2003-04 vide consolidated order dt. 23.5.2006 and ITAT orders for the A.Y. 2004-05.

6.

In view of the above we find no infirmity in the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and we dismiss both the appeals of the Revenue.

7.

In the result both and 4178/Del/10 are dismissed.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 30th November,2015.

More judgments on Section 10(23C)(vi)

All 517 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10(23C)(vi) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →