ITO 1(1), MUMBAI vs. MATOSHRI ARTS & SPORTS TRUST, MUMBAI

Per Joginder Singh (Judicial Member) The Revenue is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 23/07/2010 of the ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai. The only ground raised in this appeal pertains to granting exemption u/s 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act) without appreciating the fact that the assessee is not maintaining separate books of accounts as required under provision of section 11(4A) of the Act.

2 Matoshri Arts & Sports Trust

3 Matoshri Arts & Sports Trust disallowing the status of the assessee as a trust and treated the same as AOP broadly on the basis that the property which is in dispute with the BMC authorities, the assessee is doing business activities. While coming to this conclusion, the Assessing Officer relied upon the decision in the case of Sind Cooperative Housing Society vs ITO. The stand of the assessee is that while deciding the issue, the ld. Assessing Officer completely ignored the decision from Hon’ble Apex Court in Thanthi Trust 247 ITR 785. 2. 3. If the observation made in the assessment order, leading to addition made to the total income, conclusion drawn in the impugned order, material available on record, assertions made by the ld. respective counsel, if kept in juxtaposition and analyzed, there is no dispute to the fact that sports activities are carried out by the assessee and even certificate u/s 80G was granted to the assessee by the department. The assessee received donations from different donors, who confirmed of making the donations. The main grievance of the Assessing Officer is that in view of section 11(4A) of the Act, the assessee trust is not maintaining separate books of accounts of its activities, therefore, he termed the assessee trust as AOP and assessed the income as business income, resultantly, denied exemption u/s 11 of the Act. There is no dispute that right from inception, the assessee trust was granted exemption u/s 11 of the Act by the tax authorities. Even, if, the property is under dispute with the BMC authorities, cannot be the sole bases for 4 Matoshri Arts & Sports Trust denying exemption to the assessee. So far as, non- maintenance of separate books of accounts for different sports is concerned, we are in agreement with the finding of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that different sports are single activity of sports, therefore, cannot be treated as different activities of the trust. This view find support from the ratio laid down from Hon’ble Apex Court in Thanthi Trust 247 ITR 785 (SC). There is further uncontroverted finding in the impugned order that the assessee trust is not running restaurant, bar, etc, thus, there is no question of maintaining separate registers. The activities of the assessee trust are for the attainment of objects of the trust enshrined in the trust deed. Thus, the assessee is having a valid registration u/s 12A of the Act, granted by the Director of Income Tax (Exemption) and the Assessing Officer has not specifically pointed out any violation of the trust deed as well as the provision of section 12 & 13, therefore, we find no infirmity in the conclusion drawn by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Finally, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. This Order was pronounced in the open court in the presence of ld. representatives from both sides at the conclusion of the hearing on 19/10/2015. (Rajesh Kumar) (Joginder Singh) लेखा सद"य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER "या"यक सद"य / JUDICIAL MEMBER मुंबई Mumbai; "दनांक Dated : 19/10/2015 f{x~{tÜ? P.S/."न.स.

5 Matoshri Arts & Sports Trust आदेश क" ""त"ल"प अ"े"षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ" / The Appellant