Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust v. CIT

101 ITR 234Supreme Court of India1975#239 most cited

What is Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust v. CIT authority for?

This case defines 'education' under Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act as systematic instruction, schooling, or training given to the young for preparation for the work of life. It clarifies that 'education' in this context has a narrow meaning, not extending to every acquisition of further knowledge.

323

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sole Trustee Loka Shikshana Trust v CIT · 101 ITR 234 · definition of education · section 2(15) education · scope of education · charitable purpose · section 11 exemption · systematic instruction · schooling · training · narrow meaning of education

Sections most often in play

Section 2(15)Section 11Section 12AASection 80GSection 12ASection 12Section 11(1)(a)Section 12AB
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 52(2)section 10(22)advancement of general public utilitysection 52proviso to section 2(15)section 2(15)section 10(23c)(vi)section 10(23c)section 11(1)(a)section 11(1)section 12aaregistration under section 12a

Judgments citing Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust v. CIT

The ACIT, B.K.Circle, Palanpur vs. Smt. Alkaben Vasantlal Vora, Deesa

In the result, appeal filed by the department is dismissed

ITA 955/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Aug 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Mahavir Prasad

For Appellant: Shri Prasoon Kabra, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri A. C. Shah, A.R
Section 143(3)

…ity of transactions of purchase and sale in a class of goods and the transactions must ordinarily be entered into with a profit motive. Business is an activity capable of producing a profit which can be taxed – Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust vs. CIT[1975] 101 ITR 234 (SC). Thus, the transaction of shares in the so called ‘Investment portfolio’ of the assessee are undoubtedly in the nature of systematic and organized business activity only. 2.4 Learned AO further held in order to examine the contention of the assessee and examination was made of the shares transacted in the so called ‘Investment portfolio.’ T…

Delhi Bureau of Text Books vs. Director of Income Tax(E)

The appeals are allowed but, in the circumstances, with no orders as to costs

ITA/807/2015HC Delhi03 May 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

Section 12ASection 2Section 260

…accounts as mandated by Section 11 (4A) of the Act. The approach of the AO was to consider the Assessee as a „General Public Utility.‟ Referring to the decision of the Supreme Court in Sole Trustee Loka Shikshana Trust v. Commissioner of Income Tax (1975) 101 ITR 234 (SC), the AO observed that since the Assessee was earning huge profit margins of about 35.15%, the activity of publication and sale of books could not be said to be a „charitable activity‟. Accordingly, the AO treated the income from the sale and publication of books as taxable for each of the AYs in question. Order of the CIT (A) 10. A…

Delhi Bureau of Text Books vs. Director of Income Tax(E)

The appeals are allowed but, in the circumstances, with no orders as to costs

ITA/812/2015HC Delhi03 May 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

Section 12ASection 2Section 260

…accounts as mandated by Section 11 (4A) of the Act. The approach of the AO was to consider the Assessee as a „General Public Utility.‟ Referring to the decision of the Supreme Court in Sole Trustee Loka Shikshana Trust v. Commissioner of Income Tax (1975) 101 ITR 234 (SC), the AO observed that since the Assessee was earning huge profit margins of about 35.15%, the activity of publication and sale of books could not be said to be a „charitable activity‟. Accordingly, the AO treated the income from the sale and publication of books as taxable for each of the AYs in question. Order of the CIT (A) 10. A…

Delhi Bureau of Text Books vs. Director of Income Tax (E)

The appeals are allowed but, in the circumstances, with no orders as to costs

ITA/811/2015HC Delhi03 May 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

Section 12ASection 2Section 260

…accounts as mandated by Section 11 (4A) of the Act. The approach of the AO was to consider the Assessee as a „General Public Utility.‟ Referring to the decision of the Supreme Court in Sole Trustee Loka Shikshana Trust v. Commissioner of Income Tax (1975) 101 ITR 234 (SC), the AO observed that since the Assessee was earning huge profit margins of about 35.15%, the activity of publication and sale of books could not be said to be a „charitable activity‟. Accordingly, the AO treated the income from the sale and publication of books as taxable for each of the AYs in question. Order of the CIT (A) 10. A…

Delhi Bureau of Text Books vs. Director of Income Tax (E)

The appeals are allowed but, in the circumstances, with no orders as to costs

ITA/810/2015HC Delhi03 May 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

Section 12ASection 2Section 260

…accounts as mandated by Section 11 (4A) of the Act. The approach of the AO was to consider the Assessee as a „General Public Utility.‟ Referring to the decision of the Supreme Court in Sole Trustee Loka Shikshana Trust v. Commissioner of Income Tax (1975) 101 ITR 234 (SC), the AO observed that since the Assessee was earning huge profit margins of about 35.15%, the activity of publication and sale of books could not be said to be a „charitable activity‟. Accordingly, the AO treated the income from the sale and publication of books as taxable for each of the AYs in question. Order of the CIT (A) 10. A…

Laksh Educational and Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs. DIT (E), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6360/MUM/2012[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendraassessment Year-2012-13 Laksh Educational & Dit(Exemption), Charitable Trust, 06Th Floor, बनाम/ Regd. Office: Sahayog, Piramal Chambers, Parel, Vs. Co-Op. Society, 02Nd Floor, Mumbai-400012 Room No.7, Kirol, Vidyavihar (W), Mumbai-400086 Pan No.Aaatl7829C ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue)

Section 12ASection 2(1)

…udents of junior K.G. and Senior K.G. The assessee trust was also charging additional fee of Rs.1000/-, per child for school kit/uniform. The Ld. DIT(E) relied upon the decision from Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust vs CIT (101 ITR 234 (SC) and section 2(1) of the Act. It was found that the assessee trust does not fulfil the mandatory requirement prescribed u/s 12AA read with rule 17A and consequently, the application for registration was rejected. The assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. Before coming to any conclusion, we are of the view that at least the assessee was…

M/S. Verma Skill Tech Educational & Research Institute, Meerut vs. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6318/DEL/2013[]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2017

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahuverma Skill Tech Educational & Vs. Commissioner Of Research Institute, C/O M/S. Anuj Income-Tax, Meerut. Goyal & Co., C.A., 204, Deep Complex, Begum Bridge Road, Meerut. (Pan: Aaatv 7565K) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. P.S. Kashyap, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Mona Singh, CIT/DR
Section 12ASection 2(15)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH ‘D’ NEW DELHI BEFORE : SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Verma Skill Tech Educational & vs. Commissioner of Research Institute, C/o M/s. Anuj Income-tax, Meerut. Goyal & Co., C.A., 204, Deep Complex, Begum Bridge Road, Meerut. (PAN: AAATV 7565K) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. P.S. Kashyap, C.A. Respondent by : Ms. Mona Singh, CIT/DR. Date of hearing : 23.03.2017 Date of pronouncement : 29.03.2017 ORDER Per L.P. Sahu, Accountant Member: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT, Mee…

Rudrakash Professional Trust, Jaipur vs. CIT, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 338/JPR/2016[]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Mar 2017
For Appellant: Shri Nikhlesh kataria(CA)For Respondent: Shri Virendra Mehta (CIT)
Section 12ASection 2(15)

…the Act. 7. The word “education” used in section 2(15) for charitable purpose stipulates the systematic education or scholastic. The Apex Court had an occasion the provisions of section 2(15) of the Act in Sole Trustees, Loka Shikshana Trust vs. CIT [1975] 101 ITR 234 (SC). After considering the provisions of section 2(15) of the Act, the apex court found that all kinds of acquiring knowledge will not come within the meaning of “education”. What “education”, Connotes in character of students by normal schooling. In facts, the Apex court has observed as follows at page 241 of ITR: “The sense in which the word “…

ACIT(Exemption), Jaipur vs. Mahima Shiksha Samiti, Jaipur

In the result, all the grounds taken by the Revenue are dismissed and ground taken by the assessee society is allowed

ITA 105/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Mar 2017AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta (CA)For Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar (CIT)
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 32

…5. Section 2(15) defines “charitable purpose” to include relief of the poor, education, medical relief and the advancement of any other object of general public utility. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Sole trustee, Lok Sikshana Trust V. CIT reported in 101 ITR 234, 241 (SC) has held that “What ‘Education’ connotes in section 2(15) is the process of training and developing the knowledge, skill, mind and character of students by normal schooling. It is the systematic instruction, schooling or training given to the young in preparation for the work of life. It also connotes the whole course of scholastic inst…

Patanjali Yogpeeth (Nyas), Delhi vs. ADIT(Exemption), New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2267/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L. P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv.; &For Respondent: Shri N. C. Swain, CIT [DR]
Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(5)Section 13Section 142Section 2(15)

…n 2(15) of the Act, as elaborated hereunder: The expression ‘education’ has not been defined under the Act, however reliance in this regard may be placed on various legal precedents as discussed hereunder: The Supreme Court in the case of Lok Shikshana Trust: 101 ITR 234, explained the meaning of the word `education’ in the context of section 2(15) of the Act as under: “We have set out above the relevant clauses of the trust deed and the material part of the communications sent by the Sole Trustee. It would appear therefrom that though a number of objects, including the setting up of educational institutions, wer…

Vaigarai Public Charitable and Educational Trust, Dindigul vs. ITO, Dindigul

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 397/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George

Section 11Section 11(4)Section 12ASection 2(15)

…building of moral values, may be good for the society but cannot be construed as ‘education’’ coming within the ambit of Section 2(15) of the Act. Its perimeter has been defined by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust vs. CIT 101 ITR 234 to be something akin to normal schooling. No doubt, Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of ACIT vs. Thanthi 9. Trust 247 ITR 785 did hold that a business which do not directly accomplish wholly or in part the charitable objects of the trust but only feeds such activities could not be held as a business carried on in the course of actual accomplishm…

` Niharika Education Society, Ghaziabad vs. Addl. CIT, Ghaziabad

In the result, the ground nos

ITA 6183/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotraassessment Year : 2010-11 Niharika Education Society, Addl. Cit, Range-1, C/O Akhilesh Kumar, Advocate, Ghaziabad. Chamber No.206-07, Vs. Ansal “Satyam”, Rdc Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad. Pan : Aaatn 6147 P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 10Section 10(23)(c)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 80G

…eement was terminated as per clause given in MOU. The assessee could only provide its services as per the contractual agreement made with the IMT. 5. Relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust vs. CIT, 101 ITR 234 (SC), he pointed out that it has been held in this case as under :- “The sense in which the word “education” has been used in section 2(15) in the systematic instruction, schooling or training given to the young is preparation for the work of life. It also connotes the whole course of scholastic instruction which a person has received. The word…

ACIT (Exemptions), Bhubaneswar vs. M/S. Peoples Forum, Bhubaneswar

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue and cross objections filed

ITA 325/CTK/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack18 Jan 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.S Sainiassessment Year :2009-2010 Acit (Exemptions), Aayakar Vs. M/S. Peoples Forum, Plot Bhavan, Bhubaneswar. No.Hig 44, Dharma Vihar, Khandagiri, Bhubaneswar Pan/Gir No. Aaatp 2214 R (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 288A

…too wide, the trust may not qualify for exemption [Gangabai Charities [1992] 197 ITR 416 (SC); Assembly Rooms [2000] 241 ITR 76 (Mad)] iv) The \onus\ to prove that objects are of charitable nature is on the assessee [Indian Chamber of Commerce v. CIT [1975] 101 ITR 796 (SC)]. v) The establishment of an industrial or commercial concern ordinarily envisages a profit making activity and cannot be said to be a charitable purpose on the ground that it will provide employment to some poor persons [Dharmaposhanam Co. [1978] 114 ITR 463 (SC); Jaipur Charitable Trust [1971] 81 ITR 1 (Del); Yogiraj Charity Trust [1976]…

M/S. Hero'S Education and Welfare Society, Bhopal vs. The ACIT 3(1), Bhopal

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 232/IND/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 68

…re, held that such objects are not charitable purposes but for the purpose of profit. In the present case, the other objects are also charitable and it cannot be said that the objects are for profit making. In the case of Sole Trustee, Lok Shikshana Trust, 101 ITR 234 ( S. C.), the word “education” has been discussed. It is stated that every advancement of knowledge is not education, whereas the assessee is running a school and a college. Running an educational institution of this sort, definitely prepares people for the work of life. 9. The ld. Sr. Departmental Representative relied on the orders of AO as w…

ITO (E), New Delhi vs. M/S. Katha, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the department is dismissed

ITA 4244/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 4244/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Income Tax Officer (E), Vs M/S Katha, Ward-1(24 A-3, Aurobindo Marg, Survodhya New Delhi Enclave, New Delhi-110017 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaatk2702M Assessee By : Mrs. Lalitha Krishnamurthy, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.10.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.11.2016 Order This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 30.05.2016 Of Ld. Cit(A)-36, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Mrs. Lalitha Krishnamurthy, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 143(1)Section 2Section 2(15)

…of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee in allowing the benefit of exemption u/s 11 of the I.T. Act, 1961 in the light of decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of sole Trustee Lok Shiksha Trust Vs CIT 101 ITR 234 (SC) that 'education' in Section 2(15) connotes the process of training and developing the knowledge, skill, mind and character of students by normal schooling and it does not cannot gathering of any knowledge in the great school of life.” 2 Katha 3. From the above ground, it is gathered that the grievance of the department relates to the deleti…

ITO (E) 2(3), Mumbai vs. St Josephs Technical School, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1417/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri C.N. Prasadआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No. 1417/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Ito (E) 2(3), St. Joseph’S Technical School, बनाम/ Piramal Chambers, Premier Automobiles Road, Vs. 5Th Floor, Parel, Kurla (W), Mumbai-400 012 Mumbai-400 070 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aacts 0971N .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri Rajesh Ojha अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Kishor P. Pabari

For Respondent: Shri Kishor P. Pabari
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 13(2)(a)

…educational activity as per object of trust. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) failed to consider the education defined in the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Lok Sikshan Trust vs. CIT (1975) 101 ITR 234 and Bihar Institute of Mining & Mines Surveying (208 ITR 608) of Hon’ble Patna High Court, on which assessing officer relied. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in not treating interest free advance of Rs.1,95,00,000/- given to Don Bosco Institute of Technology is a violation of section 11(5…

ADIT (E)-II(1), Mumbai vs. Indian Institute of Material Management, Navi Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 5123/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Arora & Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.5123/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Asstt. Director Of Income Tax Indian Institute Of Material बनाम/ (Exemption)-Ii(1) Management Vs. 506, 5Th Floor, Plot No.102 & 104, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Sector-15, Institutional Area, Mumbai - 400012 Cbd Belapur, Navi – Mumbai - 400614 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaati1446A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Dr. Suman Ratnam Darsi
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(2)

…ng private commercial courses is not related Assessment Year: 2009-10 to trade and commerce industry and that this activity constitute ‘education’ which is clearly against the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Lok Shikshan Trust Vs. CIT (1975) 101 ITR 234. 2. The appellant prays that the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Mumbai be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed the return of income for the assessment year 2009-10 on 30.09.2009 along with Audited Income & Expenditure Account and Balance Sheet dec…

I.T.O. (E)(I) (1), Mumbai vs. Chetna, Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal and cross-objection are allowed, and the Revenue appeal is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 6762/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Sanjay Arora, Am The Income Tax Officer (E), Vs. Chetna, Survey No.341 Ward 1 (1), Room No.505, Government Colony, Bandra (E), 5Th Piramal Chambers, Floor, Mumbai 400 052 Parel, Mumbai 400 012 Pan:Aaatc 3012A .. Appellant Respondent

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 143(3)

…. Accordingly, the AO relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Patna High Court in the case of Bihar Institute of Mining & Mine Surveying Vs CIT (1994) 208 ITR 608 (Pat.) and the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sole Trustee, Lok Shikshana Trust Vs. CIT 101 ITR 234 held that the activities of the assessee are not charitable activities for the reason that the assessee is not existing solely purpose of education because it is running unapproved courses of Chetana’s Institute of Management & Research for the courses of PGDBM,PGDCM, PGDBA and PGPRM. According to the AO, the assessee 3 CO No.180/Mum/2015 has al…

Anand R Bahl, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 20(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed and that by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7706/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Hiten M. Vasant (AR)For Respondent: Shri B. Pruseth (DR)
Section 2(14)

…ought to be emphasized by the AO, referring to the decisions in the case of New Jahagir M. Vakil Mills Ltd. vs. CIT [1963] 49 ITR 137 (SC); Dalhousie Investment Trade Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [1968] 68 ITR 486 (SC) and Sole Trustee, Lok Shikshana Trust vs. CIT [1975] 101 ITR 234 (SC) toward the same. The assessee’s plea of having accounted for the transactions in its books as ‘investment’ would also to be little consequence; the treatment in its books of account by the assessee being not determinative of the matter, as (A.Ys. 2007-08 & 2008-09) Anand R Behl explained in, among others, Tuticorin Alkali Chemical and Fertil…

The Indian Merchants Chambers, Mumbai vs. DDIT (E) -II(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4076/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4076/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2009-2010) The Indian Merchants Chambers, Vs. Ddit(Exemption)-Ii(1), Imc Building, Imc Marg, Piramal Chambers, Mumbai-400020 Parel, Mumbai "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaati 00047 H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Arvind Sonde राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri V.S.Jadhav सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 31/03/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 29/ 06/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)- Mumbai, For The Assessment Year 2009-2010. 2. In This Appeal, The Assessee Is Basically Aggrieved For Decline Of Exemption U/S.11 On The Plea That Proviso To Section 2(15) Was Applicable To The Assessee Which Was Introduced W.E.F. Assessment Year 2009-2010. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is Registered As A Company U/S.25 Of The Companies Act, 1956. The Main Objects Of The Assessee Trust Inter Alia Are To Promote, Advance & Protect Trade, Commerce & Industry In India. The Ao Held That The Assessee Was Not Imparting Education In Pursuance Of Its Objects. He Held That The Activity Of Organizing Seminars, The Definition Of Education. The Assessee Was Running Certain Seminars

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri V.S.Jadhav
Section 11Section 2(15)Section 25Section 28

…t collected Rs.31401915/- and conducted examinations for which it collected fees of Rs1224751/-. These two activities were classified as activities to promote education. The AO relying on the Hon. Supreme Court decision in the case of Loka Shikshana Trust 101 ITR 234 and Bihar Institute of Mining 208 ITR o·Q4 Patna, Saurashtra Educatio.n Foundation Vs. CIT 273 ITR 139 (Guj), Gujarat State Co. op. Union Vs. CIT 195 ITR 279 (Guj) held that the activity of holding commerce classes, arranging seminars and lectures and the activity of running of private commercial courses and consequent conducting of examinati…