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>Tribunal Upholds Approval for Tax Exemption Under Section 10 (23C)</h1> <h3>Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh Versus M/s Infant Jesus Education Society</h3> Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh Versus M/s Infant Jesus Education Society - [2018] 404 ITR 85 (P&H) Issues involved:1. Interpretation of Section 10 (23C) (vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 regarding exemption for educational institutions.2. Applicability of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 to a school running from Class Play to Class K.G.3. Validity of the Tribunal's decision to grant approval for exemption under Section 10 (23C) (vi) based on the genuineness of activities and non-applicability of RTE Act.4. Whether the Tribunal erred in not reverting the approval decision back for re-examination.Analysis:1. The appellant-revenue challenged the Tribunal's order directing the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax to grant approval under Section 10 (23C) (vi) of the Act. The Tribunal held that the RTE Act does not apply to the school running from Class Play to Class K.G. The Tribunal's decision was based on the interpretation of statutory provisions and the school's educational scope.2. The respondent-assessee applied for exemption under Section 10 (23C) (vi) for its school running from Class Play to Class K.G. The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax initially rejected the application citing non-compliance with the RTE Act. The Tribunal overturned this decision, emphasizing that the RTE Act provisions apply to schools imparting education from Class 1 to Class 8, not to the respondent's school.3. The Tribunal's order was based on a detailed analysis of the RTE Act provisions, specifically Sections 2 (f), (n), and 12. It concluded that since the respondent's school did not fall within the ambit of imparting education from Class 1 to Class 8, the RTE Act did not apply. The Tribunal's decision was upheld as it correctly interpreted the statutory provisions and found no illegality or perversity in its findings.4. The Tribunal's decision to grant approval for exemption under Section 10 (23C) (vi) was deemed appropriate as it was based on a valid interpretation of the law. The appellant-revenue failed to establish the applicability of the RTE Act to the respondent's school or show any legal flaws in the Tribunal's reasoning. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the Tribunal's decision to grant approval for exemption without reverting it back for re-examination.
TaxTMI 