TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1983 (6) TMI 79
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of the trust as exempt on the ground that it has been applied to charitable purposes, but subsequently the CIT considered that the objects of the trust did not appear to be charitable within the meaning of s. 2(15) of the Act. He, therefore, considered the orders passed in this case as prejudicial to the interest of revenue and set aside the orders of CIT and directed him to make fresh assessments on the basis of such directions. Subsequently fresh assessments were made for the two years on 18th September, 1980 for 1973-74 and on 28th September, 1980 for the asst. yr. 1974-75. In the re-assessments it has been held that the assessee is not eligible to exemption u/ss 11 and 12 of the Act and, therefore, its income is liable to assessment w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h Court decision mentioned above that the object of benefitting the institution, Sri Aurobindo Ashram, does not conform to the concept of charitable purpose of object even assuming that that institution, Sri Aurobindo Ashram, is for charitable purposes entitled to exemption u/s 11 or 12. 2. The ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that though apparently the decision of the Madras High Court in the Workshop Trust mentioned above rendered on somewhat similar facts and nature of the trust as in the assessee's case would apparently cover the dispute raised in favour of the revenue and even assuming that the income of the assessee trust is chargeable to tax, the question still that has to be considered and decided in regard to its liability i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....his stage, the matter has to go back to the departmental authorities for a proper consideration of this questions, as they had no opportunity to examine the assessee's claim from this point of view and with reference to the points raised by him above. 4. On a careful consideration of the facts in this case and the contention of the parties, we find that on the question of assessee's claim for exemption u/s 11 of the Act there can be no doubt that the decision of the Madras High Court relied on by the revenue negatives such a claim and supports the case of the department. The facts of the case considered by the High Court and before us look more or less similar. In that case also it was found by the High Court that the sole beneficiary of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at its objects are identical with the objects of such beneficiary-institution. Therefore, on the question of exemption u/s 11 and 12 of the Act we cannot but agree with the departments claim based on the High Court decision mentioned above. 5. It remains now for us to consider the fresh claim made by the assessee before us that the liability even assuming the trust is not exempt u/s 11 should be determined with reference to the provisions of s. 161 etc. Though this aspect of the matter has not been agitated by the assessee before the departmental authorities, we cannot hold that the assessee is prevented from raising this claim, especially because this is an aspect on a pure question of law on the determination of the assessee's liability ....