TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court affirms Tribunal decision on rental income exemption under Income-tax Act</h1> <h3>Commissioner Of Income-Tax Versus Sri Thyaga Brahma Gana Sabha (regd.)</h3> The High Court affirmed the Tribunal's decision, ruling that the rental income from letting out Vani Mahal by Sri Thyaga Brahma Gana Sabha qualifies for ... Charitable Purpose Issues Involved:1. Whether the income from letting out of Vani Mahal falls within the objects of general public utility u/s 2(15) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. Whether the letting out of Vani Mahal constitutes an activity.3. Whether the letting out of Vani Mahal is an activity for profit.Summary:Issue 1: General Public UtilityThe Tribunal held that the objects of the assessee, Sri Thyaga Brahma Gana Sabha, were for general public utility within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Sabha's activities, including holding musical entertainments, dramas, dance recitals, and running a music and dance school, were deemed to promote education and fine arts, thus falling within the scope of 'advancement of objects of general public utility.'Issue 2: ActivityThe Tribunal concluded that the letting out of Vani Mahal did not amount to an activity within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act. The hall was let out only when not required by the Sabha, and the income derived from such letting was incidental to the Sabha's primary objective of promoting fine arts and education.Issue 3: Activity for ProfitEven assuming that letting out of the hall was an activity, the Tribunal held that it was not an activity for profit. The Sabha's primary object was to impart education in fine arts, and the letting out of the hall was incidental. The Tribunal noted that the income from letting out the hall was meager and the Sabha often operated at a loss. The Supreme Court's decision in CIT v. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation [1986] 159 ITR 1 was cited, emphasizing that if the predominant object is charitable, incidental profit does not alter its charitable nature.Conclusion:The High Court affirmed the Tribunal's decision, holding that the assessee's rental income from letting out Vani Mahal is exempt u/s 11 read with section 2(15) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court answered all the questions in the affirmative and against the Revenue, awarding costs to the assessee with counsel's fee fixed at Rs. 500.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
