Education institution's s.10(22) tax exemption across multiple years upheld; no activity change, appeal dismissed as no substantial law question.

Where an assessee had consistently been granted exemption under s. 10(22) in earlier and even subsequent assessment years and no change in the nature of its activities was shown, the HC held that the Tribunal's order allowing the exemption raised no substantial question of law. Relying on the SC's principle in Radhasoami Satsang that, although res judicata does not strictly apply in income-tax matters, a settled fundamental aspect permeating different years should not be disturbed absent material change, the HC refused to reopen the settled position. The appeal was declined to be entertained and was dismissed.

---

---

Issues:
1. Appeal by Revenue under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 against Tribunal's order granting exemption under section 10(22) to the respondent-assessee.
2. Dismissal of Revenue's appeal by Tribunal based on the assessee's consistent educational activities with no profit motive.
3. Assailing the Tribunal's order by Revenue on grounds of other activities carried out by the assessee.
4. Respondent's consistent exemption under section 10(22) in past and subsequent assessment years.
5. Determination of whether the Tribunal's order involves any substantial question of law.

Analysis:
The High Court of Delhi heard an appeal by the Revenue against the Tribunal's order granting exemption under section 10(22) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 to the respondent-assessee for the assessment year 1991-92. The Tribunal had dismissed the Revenue's appeal, affirming the Commissioner's conclusion that the assessee was entitled to the exemption as it was engaged solely in educational activities without any personal benefit to its members or individuals associated with the society. The Tribunal noted the assessee's consistent compliance with the educational purpose criterion for exemption. The Revenue contended that the Tribunal's findings were incorrect, citing other activities observed by the Assessing Officer in the assessment year. However, the Revenue failed to demonstrate any change in the nature of the assessee's activities compared to previous years.

Mr. Kalra, representing the respondent, highlighted the continuous exemption granted under section 10(22) to the assessee even in subsequent assessment years post the present assessment year. The High Court, considering the factual consistency and absence of any substantial change in the assessee's activities, concurred with the Tribunal's decision. The Court referred to the principle laid down in Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT, emphasizing that where a fundamental aspect remains consistent across assessment years and is not challenged, it should not be altered in a subsequent year. This principle was deemed applicable to the case at hand, leading the Court to dismiss the Revenue's appeal as it did not involve any substantial question of law.

In conclusion, the High Court declined to entertain the appeal by the Revenue, upholding the Tribunal's order granting exemption under section 10(22) to the respondent-assessee for the assessment year 1991-92 based on the consistent educational activities carried out by the society without any profit motive or deviation from the prescribed criteria for exemption.

---