TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (11) TMI 1144
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ar 2005-06 are similar to ground No.1 to 3 in assessment year 2006-07 and 2007-08. In assessment year 2006- 07 and 2007-08, the assessee has taken additional ground compared to assessment year 2005-06. These appeals were heard together and are being disposed off through a common consolidated order. For the sake of convenience, grounds of appeals relating to assessment year 2007-08 are reproduced below:- 1. That the Ld CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in allowing exemption u/s 11 r/w sec. 12 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 . 2. That the Ld CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in holding that the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble ITAT, New Delhi in its order in I.T.A. No. 5365/Del/2004 in the case of Beershiva Social Welfar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Nainital. She also observed from the objects of the society that running of school was not an object of the society and rather it was being run on sound business principal of generating profits year after year. She further observed that in assessment year 1998-99 and 2001-02 the income of the society for running of school was held to be business income. While holding that the assessee was not engaged into charitable activities, the Assessing Officer relied upon Hon'ble ITAT decision in the case of DCIT, Haldwani v. Beershiva Welfare Society, in I.T.A. No. 5365/Del/2004 for assessment year 2001-02 wherein Hon'ble Tribunal had directed the Assessing Officer to first apply the provisions of section 11(4A) and then grant exemption u/s 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o deficit. In this respect, the comparative figures of expenditure & income & surplus/deficit were provided for assessment year 1999-00 to 2007-08 and from the figures of surplus/deficit it was stressed before ld CIT(A) that the observations of Assessing Officer was not correct in so far as her finding that school was being run on sound business principals. Reliance was placed in the case of TMA Foundation & Others v. State of Karnataka & Others wherein it was held that if a reasonable surplus if generated by an educational institution to meet the cost of expansion and augmentation of facility then it will not amount to profit & charitable purpose of the institution will not be defeated. b) That appellant society is running this in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ase even when the facts, condition and circumstances in the assessment years under appeal are similar and this fact was brought to the notice of Assessing Officer also. In this respect, reliance was placed on Circular No.621 & 642 wherein it was clarified that profits & gains of business in the case of a trust or institution will not be liable to tax if the business is incidental to the attainment of the objects of the trust and separate books of accounts are maintained by institution in respect of such business. i) That the facts and circumstances of the case of M/'s Beer Shiva Social Welfare Society, Haldwani are different from the facts and circumstances of the society wherein the society was managed by founder members who were hus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ore the same may be decided accordingly. 10. We have heard the rival submissions of both the parties and have gone through the material available on record. We find that Assessing Officer herself has admitted that assessee was running a school but her only objection was that school was being run on sound commercial principal. Section 2(15) of Income Tax Act, 1961 clearly states that charitable purpose includes relief for the poor, education and medical relief and advancement of any other object of general public utility. Thus from the definition itself, it is clear that imparting of education is a charitable purpose. The facts and circumstances of the case law relating to Beer Shiva Society are not similar to the facts and circumstances ....