TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (1) TMI 186
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ology). According to the ld.representative, without considering the activity of the assessee, the Commissioner rejected the application of the assessee on irrelevant ground. Referring to the impugned order of the CIT(A), the ld.representative submitted that he could not understand the reason on which the Commissioner rejected the application. 3. Referring to the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax, more particularly paragraph 6, the ld.representative submitted that the assessee has received an amount of Rs.4,83,051 from the managing trustee as loan. However, the Commissioner misconstrued this loan received by the assessee as corpus donation. According to the ld.representative, the assessee has no property or building. The managing trustee of the trust has given a free accommodation for the trust. The ld.representative further submitted that owning a building is not a pre-condition for registration of the trust. On a query from the bench, whether conducting a study centre of Bharat Sevak Samaj and Kerala University Distance Education would come within the meaning of "education" u/s 2(15) of the Act, the ld.representative submitted that this was not considered by the Commissione....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at Sevak Samaj. The assessee is not a regular college conducting systematic education to the students. Similarly, in respect of Kerala University Distance Education, the assessee is conducting coaching classes for the students enrolled by the university at the Distance Education Centre. This is not a regular and systematic course of study. The question arises for consideration is when the assessee is conducting a coaching centre for distance education course held by the university or some organization empowered by the government, whether such activity of the assessee could be treated as "education" within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act. The Apex Court in the case of Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust vs Commissioner of Income-tax (1975) 101 ITR 234 (SC) had an occasion to consider this issue and the Apex Court found that all kinds of acquiring knowledge may not come within the term "education". The Apex Court, in fact, has observed as follows: "The sense in which the word "education" has been used in section 2(15) is the systematic instruction, schooling or training given to the young is preparation for the work of life. It also connotes the whole course of scholastic ins....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... be "education" The Commissioner being a lower authority to the Tribunal he has to follow the observations made by the Tribunal. Therefore, this Tribunal is of the opinion that remanding back the matter for reconsideration by the Commissioner may not serve any purpose at all. For the purpose of convenience, we are reproducing the observations made by this Tribunal in the case of M Star Charitable Society (supra): "4. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and also perused the material available on record. Admittedly, the taxpayer is running coaching classes. The taxpayer is not doing any other activity. The question arises for consideration is whether conducting coaching classes for the students would fall within the meaning of "education" as provided in section 2(15) of the Act. The Apex Court had an occasion to consider the provisions of section 2(15) of the Act in Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust vs Commissioner of Income-tax (1975) 101 ITR 234 (SC). After considering the provisions of sections 2(15) of the Act, the Apex Court found that all kinds of acquiring knowledge will not come within the meaning of "education". What "education". connotes in section 2(1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e a normal schooling by way of regular and systematic instruction. 7. The Patna High Court in the case of Bihar Institute of Mining And Mine Surveying vs C.I.T. (1994) 208 ITR 608 (Pat) held that mere conducting of classes for open university / distance education cannot be construed as charitable activity within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act. The Patna High Court, after considering the judgment of the Apex Court in Commissioner of Income-tax vs Andhra Chamber of Commerce (1965) 55 ITR 722 (SC) and in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust (1970) 77 ITR 61 (Mys) has observed as follows at page 615 of the ITR: "It is true that by reason of the Finance Act, 1983, the question as to whether any charitable institution is being run with a profit motive or not has lost its relevant. However, the word "charitable" prefixing the word "institution" has to be given its full effect. It appears that one of the principal projects of the petitioner's institution has the object of coaching and preparing the students for appearing in various examinations conducted by the Board of Mining Examination and / or MI(1) section (a)(b) and the said coaching....