TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (11) TMI 151
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oner Trust runs a medical college with attached hospital of 450 beds and imparts such education to 150 students of MBBS Course besides running the colleges of Pharmaceutical, Physiotherapy and Nursing having separate intake of students. During the relevant year 2008-2009, the admissions by the petitioner Trust were not made on the basis of merit list/waiting list prepared on the basis of RPMT-2008 Examination, which system has been approved by the Medical Council of India and Rajasthan University. Against such admissions made by the petitioner Trust, a writ petition, namely; SBCWP No.10858/2008 -Abhishek Sain and Ors. vs. Raj. University of Health Sc. and Ors. was filed before the High Court and learned Single Judge of this Court vide order....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nding before the Apex court as of now, it cannot be said that petitioner was not running the educational institution for educational purposes without profit motive as per the provisions of Section 10(23C) of the Act. He submitted that this is the only reason assigned by the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax in the impugned order dated 27/1/2010. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner also brought to the notice of the court that for subsequent years i.e. Assessment Year 2010-2011 and onwards, same authority i.e. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Udaipur has granted such approval under Section 10(23C) of the Act vide order dated 17/1/2011, a copy of which has been placed on record along with the additional affidavit of the petitioner.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or which sanction is required by the competent authority within the parameters like no profit motive, or object of education of the Trust etc. laid down under Section 10(23C) of the Act which are relevant and not the admission procedure undertaken by the petitioner Trust. Nexus between the profit motive and alleged illegal admission is too remote and cannot be presumed without any other adverse material on record against the assessee, for drawing such adverse inference. Learned Chief Commissioner of Income Tax vide order dated 27/1/2010 has only assigned one single reason as stated above to deny the approval under Section 10(23C) of the Act. The relevant portion of the impugned order dated 27/1/2010 is reproduced hereunder for ready referen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s reads as under:- "In exercise of powers conferred on me by the sub-clause (vi) of clause (23C) of Section 10 of the Income tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961) read with rule 2CA of the I.T.Rules, 1962, I Chief Commissioner of Income tax, Udaipur hereby accord approval to M/S. GEETANJALI UNIVERSITY TRUST, UDAIPUR (PAN: AAATG9525E) for the purpose of the said section for the assessment year 2010-11 and onwards subject to conditions mentioned hereunder:" 8. If the alleged illegal admissions made by the petitioner Trust in the year 2008-09 could be a valid criteria or relevant consideration for denying approval under section 10(23C) of the Act, such alleged illegal admissions continued in the subsequent years also as those students....