TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (8) TMI 76
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-2010 u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter "the Act"). 2. The only issue in this appeal of the Revenue is as regards to the order of the CIT (A) in allowing exemption u/s 11 and u/s 10(23C) (vi) of the Act, the assessee being an Educational Institute. The assessee has contested confirmation of disallowance of exemption in respect of payment of penalty by the assessee to AICTE, New Delhi amounting to Rs. 63 lacs and disallowance of exemption in respect of rental income in its Cross Objection. 3. Briefly stated facts are that the assessee is a Public Charitable Trust engaged in educational activities. The assessee is running the following Institutes:- S. No. Name of Institutions Courses 1 Chetana's H.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....reme Court in Sole Trustee, Lok Shikshana Trust Vs. CIT 101 ITR 234 held that the activities of the assessee are not charitable activities for the reason that the assessee is not existing solely purpose of education because it is running unapproved courses of Chetana's Institute of Management & Research for the courses of PGDBM,PGDCM, PGDBA and PGPRM. According to the AO, the assessee has also violated the terms of land allotted by the Government and for this penalty was levied by AICTE on the institution amounting to Rs. 63 lacs. According to the AO, profiteering is the main motive of the assessee as it has earned a fee of Rs. 1.75 crores for the above mentioned courses, which are unrecognized. He also noted that the assessee's expenditure....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....given on rent from which rental income was earned and deleted the disallowance of capital expenditure and also depreciation but confirmed the disallowance of exemption in respect to expenses incurred on account of Amrut Mahotsav and addition made on account of penalty levied by AICTE, New Delhi amounting to Rs. 63,00,000/-. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT (A), the Revenue challenged the allowance of exemption u/s 11 and Section 10(23C) (vi) of the Act on deficit arising out of the expenditure out of the income of which exemption has already been claimed and allowed set off of deficit of earlier years against the income of the current year. The assessee has challenged the order of the CIT (A) on the issue of confirmation of addition ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re withdrawn till date. The learned Counsel also stated that there is no charge that the assessee has not made investment as per the provisions of Section10 (23C) (vii) of the Act. In respect of the disallowance of Rs. 2,06,048/- the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that the assessee celebrated Amrut Mahotshav on account of completion of 75 years of age of its Founder, Shri Madhukar Rao Choudhary, in the assessment year 2003-04 and the expenditure incurred was debited in the account of Chetana Institute of Management (Computer Division). The balance of Rs. 3,00,000/- out of the advance given to the said Institute remained outstanding in the books of Chetana Computer Division which was carried forward till assessment year 2007-08. An ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ourt in the case of J. K. Synthetics Ltd. Vs Union of India [192] 65 Taxman 420 (SC), since this decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is in respect of computation of income under the head business and, therefore, the same is not applicable to the facts of the assessee's case. 8. We find from the facts of the case that the assessee is already registered as a Trust u/s 12A and also u/s 80G of the Act. The assessee is also granted exemption u/s 10 (23C) (vi) of the Act by the CCIT, Mumbai vide Order dated 08-05-2008 for and from the assessment year 2008-09. We find that the objects of the assessee Trust were to promote, support, establish and conduct college or colleges, schools and institutions for advancement of education and other assis....