TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (6) TMI 350
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....impugned assessment year the AO asked the assessee to submit the details of the courses conducted by the trust. From the details furnished by the assessee, the AO noted that the assessee was conducting two categories of courses i.e. one which were approved and recognized by the Director General of Shipping and another set of courses which were not approved and recognized by the Director General of Shipping. From the various details furnished by the assessee, the AO noted that the number of courses conducted by the assessee which were approved by the DG Shipping are much less than those courses conducted by the assessee which were not approved by the DG Shipping. According to the AO, the courses which are not approved and recognized by the DG Shipping are conducted by the assessee as private coaching classes and such courses by no stretch of reasoning and imagination can be of the character of 'Charitable Purpose' as provided u/s.2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. The AO analyzed the courses actually conducted during the period relevant to the Assessment Year 2007-08. From the various details furnished by the assessee he noted that the assessee has made profit of Rs..99,22,167/-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he exemption u/s.11 of the I.T. Act. 5.1 Based on the arguments advanced by the assessee the Ld. CIT(A) directed the AO to allow the exemption u/s.11 of the I.T. Act to the assessee trust by holding as under :- " I have considered the A.O's order and also taken note of the reasons given by the A.O. for making denial of the claim of exemption made by the appellant. I have also taken note of the appellant's submission, which has been depicted above. Having taken note of the A.O.'s order and the appellant's submission, I am of the considered view that the A.O. has wrongly denied the exemption claimed by the appellant. The A.O's findings is based upon two fold, the first one is that the appellant is running courses, which are not approved by the DG (Shipping). The appellant trust is also carrying out non approved courses i.e. other than the DG (Shipping) approved courses and hence he denied the claim of the appellant. The second fold for denial of exemption is the A.O's observation that the different courses run by the appellant trust are not for charitable in nature as envisaged u/s 2(15) of the IT Act, but are carried out to earn profit. Thus, he also viewed that the appellant trus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions of 11, 12 & 13 of the IT Act. This is also a fact that the appellant trust has a valid registration u/s 12A granted by the DIT(E), Mumbai. Thus, having considered the appellant's submission and also taking note of the various judicial pronouncements referred by the appellant trust in its submission depicted above including judgment of jurisdictional High Court and the Tribunal, I am of the considered view that the AO's action of denial of exemption was not justified. Hence having considered all these facts as discussed above, I consider it proper and appropriate to direct the A.O. to allow the exemption u/s.11 of the I.T. Act to the appellant trust." 6. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) the Revenue is in appeal before us with the following grounds :- "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in directing the Assessing Officer to allow the exemption u/s.11 of the I.T. Act, 1961 without appreciating the fact that the courses which were not approved by the D.G. Shipping cannot be considered as formal education by normal schooling. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nita Vishram Trust vs. Chief CIT reported in 327 ITR 121 he submitted that when the investment from surplus activity applied for educational purposes and when the primary objective of the trust is to provide education for women, the benefit of exemption u/s.10(23C) was held to be valid. 8.3 Referring to the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. S.R.M Foundation of India reported in 21 ITD 598 he submitted that the Tribunal in the said decision has held that there is no requirement prescribed u/s.10(22) that the institution should be recognized by an University or State or Central Government. Therefore, the AO's insistence on any such recognition was not justified. Referring to the said decision he submitted that even Yoga Class was recognized as education by the Tribunal in the said decision. Referring to the Income and Expenditure A/c. of the assessee trust from Assessment Year 2007-08 to 2011-12, he drew the attention of the bench to the huge amount of capital expenditure incurred by the assessee for imparting education by the Trust. 8.4 Referring to the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Indian Institute of Bankers vs.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....up, administer and maintain technical training institutes at various places in India, for Pre-sea and Post-sea training for the Shipping and Maritime Industry as a Public Charitable Institute for education in this connection to provide for onboard and offshore training and continuing technical educational training for officers both on the deck and engine side. 2. To register with the DG Shipping and obtain necessary approvals from other Governmental agencies at the State and Central level connected with such matters, to achieve the main objects of the trust." 9.2 The submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the assessee Trust has been registered wit the D.G. Shipping and Charity Commissioner of Mumbai and granted registration u/s.12A of the I.T. Act by the DIT(Exemption), Mumbai could not be controverted by the Ld. CIT(A) DR. The further submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that no part of the profit has been utilized for other than educational purpose and no part of the profit has been distributed could not be controverted by the Ld. DR. We find the term education has been defined as under : "The Black's Law Dictionary defines the term, "education" as "compr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....see was covered within the meaning of the term "any other educational institution" under section 10(22) of the Act. On appeal : Held, dismissing the appeal and affirming the decision of the Tribunal, that the return filed for the assessment year 1993-94 revealed that the entire income had been utilized for the purpose of its objects. Therefore, the finding of the Tribunal was not perverse and there was no substantial question of law arising for consideration." 9.5 We find the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Indian Institute of Bankers (supra) after considering the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sole Trustee, Lok Shikshan Trust (supra) has held that the assessee institution imparting education of banking subjects by conducting tutorial classes, supplying study material, conducting programmes and holding exhibition was an educational institution entitled to exemption u/s. 10(22). 9.6 We find the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of S.R.M Foundation of India (supra) while deciding the issue u/s.10(22) of the I.T. Act has held that there is no requirement prescribed u/s.10(22) that the institution should be recognized by an University or Sta....