1988 (10) TMI 77

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on of a magazine which is in the nature of a commercial venture, is entitled to exemption as provided under s. 11 of the IT Act, 1961?" 2. The assessee is a company. It is a federation of Hotel and Restaurant Associations ofIndia, which receives membership subscription from its members which are mainly the associations. It also receives entrance fee from its members. It holds annual convention regularly every year. It claimed exemption under s. 11 of the IT Act, 1961 and filed alongwith the return, form No. 10B being audit report under s. 12-A(b). The ITO noticing that the assessee was not registered under s. 12-A(a) of the IT Act, 1961 with the CIT, Delhi-II, held that it could not claim exemption under s. 11. The ITO took the view that....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the footing of a trade association assessable in terms of s. 28( iii). 4. After examining the various decisions which had been relied upon on behalf of the assessee, Tribunal took the view on the facts of the present case that assessee having been held to be entitled to exemption under s. 11 for the previous years 1976-77, 1978-79 and 1980-81, it was entitled to claim exemption under s. 11 in view of the decision of Puna Bench in the case of ITO vs. Shahji Chattarpati General Charitable Trust (1986) 26 TTJ (Pune) 262 : (1986) 15 ITD 556 (Pune). The Tribunal noticed that in the present case also the application for registration under s. 12-A was pending and had not been rejected. Even for the subsequent asst. yr. 1984-85 the learned CIT(....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... score a technical point or over-reach a weaker party to avoid a just liability or secure an unfair advantage simply because legal devices provide such an opportunity. Next he referred to another decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Maharashtra vs Narayan Venkatesh Deshpande AIR 1976 (SC) 1204 wherein Bhagwatin J. held that the Governments should not adopt a litigious approach and waste public revenues on fruitless and futile litigation, where there are no chances of success. On the question of allowability of costs, reliance was placed by Shri Juneja on the decision of the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of ITO vs. Kamal and Co. (1988) 24 STL 198 (Raj). In that case the Board of Revenue in Rajasthan had allowed co....