Tribunal upholds assessee's exemption under section 11, activities for public utility, no profit motive. Assessment reopening valid.

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals, upholding the exemption u/s.11 of the Act for the assessee, as the activities were deemed to be for general public utility and not driven by a profit motive. The Tribunal also confirmed the validity of the assessment reopening and ruled that the activities were not hit by the proviso to section 2(15) introduced in 2009.

---

---

Issues:
- Whether the CIT(A) was right in allowing the benefit of exemption u/s.11 of the Act when the assessee is carrying out commercial activitiesRs.
- Validity of reopening of assessment u/s.147/148 of the Act.
- Whether the activities of the assessee are hit by the proviso to section 2(15) introduced w.e.f. 01-04-2009Rs.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Exemption u/s.11 of the Act
- The Revenue filed two appeals against separate orders of CIT(A)-10, Pune for A.Yrs. 2009-10 & 2012-13, raising similar grounds related to the exemption u/s.11 of the Act.
- The AO opined that the trust's activities were commercial in nature, disallowed certain claims, and determined the income of the assessee.
- CIT(A) held that the assessee was not hit by the provisions of section 2(15) of the Act, as the activities were incidental to the main objects of the Trust.
- The Tribunal, referring to past judgments and the Memorandum of Association, concluded that the assessee was entitled to exemption u/s.11 as the dominant activity was not for profit but for general public utility.
- The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals, stating that there was no abnormal profit motive and the profits were ploughed back into the trust for its objectives.

Issue 2: Validity of Reopening of Assessment
- CIT(A) held that the reopening of assessment u/s.147/148 of the Act was valid, which was not contested further in the Tribunal's decision.

Issue 3: Activities Hit by Proviso to Section 2(15)
- The Tribunal found that the activities of the assessee were not hit by the proviso to section 2(15) introduced in 2009, as the fees generation was incidental and not the dominant purpose of the Trust's activities.
- The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision based on the rule of consistency and past judgments, dismissing the Revenue's grounds for both assessment years.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals, upholding the exemption u/s.11 of the Act for the assessee, as the activities were deemed to be for general public utility and not driven by a profit motive. The Tribunal also confirmed the validity of the assessment reopening and ruled that the activities were not hit by the proviso to section 2(15) introduced in 2009.

---