TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (12) TMI 1177
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot appreciating the fact that assessee trust rented out various commercial properties for commercial purposes and reported commercial receipts in the form of rental income at Rs. 63,17,202/- which is the separate activity purely commercial nature having no relevance with the educational activity thus, covered with the amended provision of section 2(15) of the IT Act, 1961. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in not appreciating the fact that the assessee is imposing various costs upon education in the form of admin expenses, advertisement, staff mess, staff uniforms, travelling and conveyance, repair and maintenance, interest on loan for acquisition of assets and even not refunded caution money to the students after lapse of years thus case of assessee is fully covered with the case law decided by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in case of Asstt. CIT v. Graphic Era Educational Society [2007] 68 ITJ 608 and ration of case law of case Vodithala Education Society v. ADIT (Exem)(ITAT, hyd) 20 SOT 353 is fully applicable in the case of assessee. 3. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in not appreciating the fact that imparting education....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 3. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has further erred in failing to consider the judgments of the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. 358 ITR 295 wherein it has been held that having taken a stand in the preceding assessment years, Revenue cannot be allowed to flip-flop on the issue. 4. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has further erred in not recording a specific finding that the assessee is also engaged in the advancement of any other object of general public utility despite the fact that he has held in para 4.1 that prima facie, no case is made out for the trust to be covered under the other objects clause in section 2(15) of the Act. 5. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in holding, that principles of consistency do not apply, despite the fact that he has held while adjudicating the claim of the assessee that no income of the assessee is to be included in the total income, as was held in the preceding assessment years. 6. That in so holding he has failed to comprehend that admittedly the facts and circumstances of the instant year are identically the sam....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee and stated as under:- i. The assessee is engaged in business activities in the guise of educational activities as it charges huge fees and has caution money. ii. Assessee is yielding profits @26% of the gross receipt and therefore, it is running charity activity with a profit motive. iii. It has several receipts in the main trust such as rent receipt from 15 different immovable properties and further donation received from various Dharamshala where complete address of the donor was not available. iv. The assessee is earning interest income of Rs. 5438244/- as interest on fixed deposits and therefore, assessee is engaged in the business of capital building. v. The assessee has given donation to other trusts which violates the provisions of section 13(1)(c)of the Act. hence, according to the Assessing Officer assessee is not entitled for claiming exemption u/s 11 and 12 of the Act. vi. The six out of nine vehicles are purchases in the name of the trustees therefore the provisions of section 13(2)(g) are violated. vii. Assessee is engaged in the activities of advancement of any other objection of general public util....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee and the hostel activities, bus fee etc are not educational activities. He further referred to page No. 21 of the order of the Ld. assessing officer to say that there are anonymous receipts of the donation. He further stated that the same is a profit-making business of the assessee and further the expense on educational activities is merely 2.2%. It was further his argument that donations are not voluntary, but are room rent charges and hence cannot be stated to be voluntary contribution. He further referred to the various decisions cited by him in the grounds of appeal. His written submission is as under:- " Written Submission in the above case- reg. In the above case, it may be pointed out that the Ld.CIT (A) has NOT CONSIDERED the arguments given by Asessing Officer in his 36 page order and given findings in a very small Para 4.1 It is humbly submitted that the following facts may kindly be considered : 1. Section 2(15) of I.T. Act has been amended w.e.f 01.04.2009. The relevant provision is reproduced below: (15) "charitable purpose" includes relief of the poor, education, medical relief. [preservation of environment (inc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....EE TO PROVE THAT THESE TRUSTS WERE HAVING SIMILAR OBJECTS, WHICH HAS NOT BEEN DISCHARGED (iv) The assessee is receiving rental of Rs. 63,17,202/- from so called Dharamshalas. No separate books of account have been maintained for Dharamshalas which is mandatory as per provisions of Section 11 (4A). (v) 6 out of 9 vehicles have been purchased and registered in the name of individual trustees/ manager. (vi) The assessee has not maintained proper addresses of donors/ money givers. There are no complete details of Rs. 40,81,528/- received from foreigners as donation. (vii) Caution money of Rs. 26,95,426/- has not been refunded. The assessee is charging for T & D fee, enrollment fee, development fee, welfare fee, prospectus fee, sports fee, examination fee, bus charges, insurance, security, sale of MAT form, (viii) It is running only professional courses, (ix) The assessee is charging fees at the rates prescribed by the Government without giving any discount. (x) Assessing Officer has pointed out that the assessee was charging rental against accommodation provided in Dharamshala. The ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rustees/ manager In this regard, the following decision may kindly be considered: 1- DIT v. Charaniiv Charitable Trust [2014] 43 taxmann.com 300 (Delhi)/[2014l 223 Taxman 71 (Delhi)/[2014] 267 CTR 305 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that Where in case of a charitable trust, it is found that provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) read with section 13(3) are not followed, trust would lose its exemption in entirety, with result that assessment of its income will be made according to provisions of Act." 8. The Ld. authorized representative, senior advocate Shri C. S. Agrawal, vehemently contested the argument of the Ld. departmental representative, and relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT (A). He further referred to his written submission placed before the Ld. CIT (A) placed at page number 501-534 of paper book and further he has placed the written submission separately before us to be considered. He further stated that in past year as well as in this year, receipts are identical and there is no change in the nature of receipts for assessment years 2003-04 to 2009-10. He further referred to the order of the coordinate bench in a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by the persons who have stayed in the dharmshala. Therefore, these are voluntary contributions only. He submitted that ld AO has wrongly reached to the conclusion that dharmshala donations are tariffs of staying in that precincts. He further submitted that with respect to the donation received from the foreigners the assessee is registered under The Foreign Contribution Regulation Act, which covers the donation received from the foreign nationals and complete details are maintained by the assessee. Therefore, the claim of the revenue that a donation of Rs. 4081528/-received from the foreign nationals does not have the complete details is incorrect. He further submitted that those donations are required to be deposited in a separate bank account and their names are KYC compliant. He in fact submitted that there is a separate law which the governs the identity of the persons who are giving donation to an Indian trust from foreign countries and the provision of that act are more stringent than the Income Tax Act. He further submitted that the receipt of caution money, enrolment fee, welfare fee, prospectus fee , sports fee, examination fee and bus charges etc are all for the purposes....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....section 12A(a) of the Act vide registration no. C No.: 40(3)/Nibandhan/Rishikesh/89-9-/CIB/22448 on 31.01.1990 with effect from 01.04.1989 and aforesaid registration is still subsisting. 2.1 That since its inception i.e. AY 1990-91, assessee trust had been furnishing its return of income and till the AY 2009-10, exemption claimed by the assessee has been allowed except for the AY 2002-03 when exemption was denied by the AO, however same was allowed by the learned CIT (A) and upheld by the Hon'ble Tribunal and Hon'ble High Court (see pages 465-489 of PB). That the nature of activities carried by the assessee continues to remain the same and there has been no change in facts and circumstances of the case (see pages 504-506 of PB). 2.2 That the assessee trust in the year under consideration carried on following charitable activities: i. Running of educational institute in the name of Omkarananda Institute of Management and Technology. ii. Running two public libraries in the following names: a. Omkarananda Public Library b. Omkarananda Ram Ashram Library iii. Running three Dharmashalas ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Disallowance of Inter organization donations Rs. 42,83,6877/- iv. Addition on account of fixed assets Rs. 64,7 1,7877/- Total Rs. 1,80,72,2777/- 2.5 Before the learned CIT (A) assessee filed a paper book containing notices issued by the learned AO, replies filed by the assessee along with documentary evidences which are appearing at sl. No. 1-22 of the Paper Book filed before the Hon'ble Tribunal. Assessee also filed its detailed written submissions before the learned CIT (A) which is appearing at pages 501-534 of PB wherein each of the finding of the learned AO has been countered by the assessee. The assessee submitted that there were more than 30 factual errors in the order of the learned AO. A copy of such factual errors as was submitted before the learned CIT (A) has been annexed as Annexure-I of the brief synopsis. That the learned CIT DR has made no adverse comments on such submissions which was on the record of the learned CIT (A). 2.6 That the learned CIT (A) after duly considering the finding of the learned AO, submissions of the assessee and paper book filed before him, allowed the appeal of the assessee by holding that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....isconceived. Receipts of Dharmashala, renting of properties, receipts of T&D, enrolment fee, development fee, welfare fee, prospectus fee, sports fee, examination fee, bus charges, insurance, security, sale of MAT form is in the nature of advancement of any other object of general public utility. • Detailed submissions are at pages 512-518, 521 & 522-523 of PB • It is submitted that aforesaid contention of the revenue is misconceived as he has failed to appreciate that predominant object of the assessee is to provide education and during the course of aforesaid objects, it has receipts from receipts of T&D, enrolment fee, development fee, welfare fee, prospectus fee, sports fee, examination fee, bus charges, insurance, security, sale of MAT form, however all such receipts have been applied for the charitable purposes. • It is submitted that assessee trust is running educational institution and to facilitate the students for getting the education, it has provided various facilities to the students so that students can get the education with minimum disturbance. In fact, there is no allegation that fee charged by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....resaid judgment, it is submitted that since the predominant object of the activity is to carry out the charitable purpose and not to earn profit, as such, merely because, assessee has receipts from such activities. In view of the reasons given in the assessment order, the assessee is covered by proviso to section 2(15) of the Act and hence not eligible for deduction u/ss 11 & 12 of the Act. The finding on the basis of which aforesaid contention has been made are as under: That the aforesaid contention of the revenue is wholly misconceived as finding of the learned AO is based on 34 factual errors and without considering the submissions made before the learned AO as well as overlooking the material/evidences on record. The submission of the assessee in respect of each of the finding is stated hereunder: The trust owned 55 immovable properties and has purchased hotels which are now functioning as Dharmashala. Detailed submissions are at pages 519-521 of PB It is respectfully submitted that that none of the aforesaid properties has been purchased by the assessee during this year (see pages 492-495 of the Paper Book). From the perusal of the list of the propert....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... DTR 402, it was held that exemption u/s 11 cannot be denied on the ground that trust had let out the property for efficient utilization of its assets. Further, Pune Bench of the Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of Bharati Vidyapeeth (ITA No. 916/PN/2010 Asstt. Year: 1999-2000 dated 23rd January, 2012) has held that there is no prohibition in Section 11 that a Charitable Trust cannot give its properties on rent. Assessee amended clause 7 of the trust deed without providing information to the Commissioner of Income Tax. This contention is again misconceived as from the perusal of trust deed it would be seen that the trust deed is dated 31.03.1989 (pages 37-58 of PB) further the supplementary trust deed is dated 07.11.1989 (pages 68-71 of PB) and assessee trust was granted registration only on 31.01.1990 (page 59 of PB), as such assumption that the supplementary trust deed was not available with the Commissioner of Income Tax is wholly misconceived. Apart from the aforesaid, it is submitted that since 07.11.1989 (when the supplementary deed was executed), till AY 2009-10, assessment of the assessee trust was made and no such allegation was even made and hence the afor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ble Trust [1992] 196 ITR 31 (All.); iv. Nirmala Bakubhai Foundation [1997] 226 ITR 394 (Guj.) v. CBDT i.e. Instruction : No. 1132, dated 5-1-1978. Assessee is receiving rental from so-called Dharmashalas. No separate books of account have been maintained which is mandatory u/s 11 (4A) of the Act. It is submitted that assessee has not charged any rental from the Dharmashalas and as such, section 11(4A) is inapplicable as Section 11(4A) is applicable only in a case where a trust is carrying out an activity for profit, and the business is incidental to the attainment of main objects, only then as per aforesaid provision, an assessee is required to maintain separate books of account in respect of such business activity. It is submitted that since the assessee is not running any business and no rental has been charged from the pilgrims staying in the Dharmashala, as such, section 11 (4A) is inapplicable. 6 out of 9 vehicles have been purchased and registered in the name of individual trustees/ manager. Detailed submissions are at pages 521-522 of PB It is submitted that though the assessee has purchased few vehicles in the na....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....been charged with profit motive and all such receipts have been utilized towards the objects of the trust It is running only professional courses. It is submitted that providing education by way of professional courses is also education within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act. Reliance is placed on the following judgments: (a) Mudra Foundation for Communications Research & Education v. CCIT [2016] 287 CTR 135 (Gujarat) (b) ADIT(E) v. Bird Education Society for Travel & Tourism [2016] 181 TTJ 782 (Delhi - Trib.) (c)DIT v. Sri Belimatha Mahasamsthana Socio-Cultural and Educational Trust [2011] 336 ITR 694 (Karnataka) The assessee is charging fee at the rate prescribed by the government without any discount It is submitted that assessee trust is not charging any fee over and above the fee prescribed by the Government and all the receipts of the educational institution has been utilized towards the objects of the trust (ACIT v. Graphic Era Educational Society 108 TTJ 608 (Delhi)) Rental received from the Dharmashala has been shown as donation. It is factually incorrect and no rental has been received from the Dha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and was merely promoting the preaching of Shri. Aurobindo as such, it was held that acquisition of all kind of knowledge cannot be construed as education. In fact, aforesaid order supports the case of the assessee wherein it was held that "education is a formal schooling which results in confirmation of a degree or diploma by government or a government agency or a university established under law. In the instant case, professional course run by the assessee are duly approved by government or a government agency or a university established under law as such aforesaid order is inapplicable Daya Nand Pushpa Devi Charitable Trust v. Addl. CIT (IT Appeal No. 4238/Del/2015, dated 21.09.2016) In this case, the assessee was providing hostel to the students, which was treated by the Hon'ble Tribunal as business and no separate books of account was maintained in respect of the same as such, in respect of the hostel activities, exemption was denied. In any case, in the instant case, hostel facilities has not been provided with profit motive and is not the business of the assessee and as such provisions of section 11 (4A) is inapplicable. Reliance is placed on the following....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tions were given to the trusts having common trustees, and such donations were not utilized for the benefit of the trustees but were utilized towards the attainment of its objects and such trusts have also utilized the sum towards the charitable objects as such, provisions of section 13(l)(c) is inapplicable. Further in respect of purchase of vehicles, it is submitted that vehicles have been utilized towards the purposes of the trust and there is not even any allegation that such vehicles have been used for the benefit of the trustees, as such, aforesaid judgment is inapplicable. ACIT v. Graphic Era Educational Society 108 TTJ 608 (Delhi). It is submitted that aforesaid order fully supports the case of the assessee and in fact, appeal of the revenue was dismissed. In this case, AO denied exemption holding that, assessee was charging hefty fee from students and imparting education in return, and, thus, it was earning profit and not doing any charity. It was however found that assessee was duly recognized by HNB Garhwal University and strictly following university regulations with regard to admission charging of fees and course curriculum and had on its governing body....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 671 para 43 that, "it is not possible to accept that the grant of exemption to the assessee for the past several decades was palpably erroneous and successive Assessing Officer were wrong in accepting that the activities of the assessee were in furtherance of its charitable objects, entitling the assessee to escape the levy of income tax". The Hon'ble High Court allowed the appeal of the assessee by giving other reasons as well however, primarily it held that if an exemption is being granted since several years, the same cannot be denied, the facts remaining the same. 6. In the instant case, it is submitted that the facts continue to remain the same since inception. The activities carried on by the assessee continue to remain the same. The sources of receipts remain identical. It has been earning income from property held under trust. It has not been held that assessee was engaged in any business when it carried on identical activities. Thus it is submitted the revenue's contention that there is since change in law and that too not in the instant year but in the preceding year could not be a ground at all to hold that the assessee is not eligible to the claim of exempti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ms i.e. Rs. 32,11,5107- and Rs. 32,60,2377-, despite the same was not considered while adopting surplus of Rs. 56,48,5267-, which is evidently a double addition. It is stated that Rs. 56,48,5267-when was adopted as surplus included the said sum. • Lastly depreciation which is allowable has been added i.e. Rs. 16,68,3177-, which has to be allowed while computing total income, (see Delhi High Court in DIT v. Indraprastha Cancer Society, 229 Taxman 93)" 9. Countering the claim of the ld. authorised representative, ld. departmental representative in rejoinder submitted that following decisions may be considered:- a. CIT v. Vijeta Educational Society [IT Appeal No. 132 of 2006, dated 17.8.2011] b. CIT v. Audh Educational Society [2011] 15 taxmann.com 235/203 Taxman 166 (All.) c. Dy. CIT v. India Cements Educational Society [2016] 157 ITD 1008/67 taxmann.com 236 (Chennai - Trib.) 10. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the orders of the lower authority. The undisputed facts in this case are that the assessee trust is registered u/s 12A of the Act as well as u/s 80G(5) of the Act. It was formed on 31.03.1989. The mai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e trustees. Accordingly, the assessment order was framed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 31.03.2012 where the income of the assessee is assessed without giving benefit of sections 11 and 12 of the Act. 12. Based on the above it is apparent that ld Assessing Officer has held that appellant is engaged in the business of education and therefore, not eligible for benefit u/s 11. He was further of the view that the properties of the trust are held for commercial purposes to earn the profit such as rental income from Dharmashala as well as rental income from other commercial assets and therefore, the objects of the assessee are advancement of any other object of general public utility hit by the first proviso to section 2(15) of the Act. the ld AO was further of the view donation of Rs. 4283687/- to another trust violates the provision of section 13(3)(e) of the Act and further as the assessee has infringed the provisions of section 13(2)(g) as six vehicles are purchased in the name of the trustees. 13. On appeal before the ld CIT (A) he decided the issue as under:- '4.1 The findings of Id.AO and the averments of Id. ARs have been carefully perused. An deniable fact that emer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ade to the other organisations were disallowed by the revenue. 1.2 It is submitted that while making the addition of the aforesaid sum, learned A O has held that since in the donee trust, some of the trustees are common as such, by giving donations to the trust, appellant has infringed the provisions of section !3(l)(c) r/w section 13(3)(e) of the Act and thus not eligible for claiming exemption. Further, while making the addition of the aforesaid sum. learned AO also placed reliance on the order of (he Tribunal in the case of Aurolab Trust v. CIT reported in 121TR (Trib) 74. 1.3 At the outset, it is also relevant to mention that in AY 2002-2003, assessee made donations of Rs. 57,73,1681- to six organisations/institutions (including three trusts to whom donations has been made in the instant assessment year) (see page 466 of the Paper Book) and in the order of the assessment, learned AO made addition of the aforesaid sum by invoking section I3(l)(c) r/w section 13(3) of the Act (see pages 465-467 of the PB). In the appeal filed by the assessee, Id. CIT (A) allowed the appeal of the assessee (see pages 472- 482 of the Paper Book). That aforesaid order of the Id CIT....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the donations of Rs. 42,83,687/- to 10 other organizations which are also charitable trusts, is not the application of income as he has failed to appreciate that the moment the donation is effected in favour of the donee trust which is also a charitable trust, application of the income for charitable or religious purposes is complete. 1.7 If is submitted that if the assessee either itself uses any part of its income for charitable purposes or donates the same to any other charitable trust, such income is exempt from inclusion in the total income of the assessee for the relevant year, as the same also amounts to application of income by the donor trust. That Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Shri Ram Memorial Foundation (2004) 269 ITR 35 has held that when a donor trust which is itself a charitable and religious trust donates its income to another trust, Ihe provisions of Section ll(l)(a) can be said to have been met by such donor trust and the donor trust can be said to have applied its income for religious and charitable purposes. Further reliance is placed on the following judicial pronouncements: i. DIT(E) v. M/s Bagri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd thereafter arriving at a different conclusion vis-a-vis earlier years. An illuminating passage contained in the case of Krishak Bharti Cooperative Ltd. v. DCIT reported in 350 ITR 24 (Delhi) may be reproduced:- It is now necessary to take up the submission that the Tribunal erred in departing from the consistency rule. This is based on the fact that for a period of about 15 year, the income-tax authorities had accepted the assessee's submissions and permitted annual amortization of the initial lease consideration as advance rent. There cannot be a wide application of the rule of consistency. In Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT [1992] 60 Taxman 248 the Supreme court acknowledged that there is no res judicata as regards assessment orders. And assessments for one year may not bind the officer for the next year. This is consistent with the view that 'there is no such thing as res judicata in income-tax matter'. Similarly, erroneous or mistaken views cannot fetter the authorities into repeating them. By application of rule such as estoppels. For the reason that being an equitable principle. It has to be yield to the mandate of law. A deeper reflection would show that bl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ground is dismissed since mere initiation itself is not an appealable order u/s 246A of the Act. 10. In result this appeal is partly allowed.' In this background we proceed to decide the grounds raised by the Revenue. 14. The first ground is that the assessee has rented out various commercial properties and reported commercial receipts in the form of rental income of Rs. 6317202/- which is separate activity purely commercial in nature and does not have any relation between educational activities and thus covered under the amended provisions of 2(15) of the Act. We have carefully considered the rival contentions. The receipt of the assessee of the income of Rs. 63 lakhs from 55 properties, which also includes various hostels and guesthouses. It is rented out in part to 82 persons and earned a rental income of Rs. 6317202/-. The tenants include small businessperson as well as Govt. of India and banks. It is claimed by the assessee that most of the tenants were pre-existing even before the property was purchased by the trust. However, the AO has also stated that assessee has purchased 30 flats in two apartments just to carry the business of letting out the flats and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ich is mandatory as per provisions of Section 11 (4A). The identical issue has been decided by coordinate bench in ACIT v. Shri Panchayati Dharmashala for AY 2010-11 on 01.01.2016 in [IT Appeal No. 809 (Jaipur) of 2013 after analysis the trust deed where it is stated that in the eventuality of dissolution the trust property is vest in another trust or to the state government and income arising from such activities shall only be spent charitable activities the coordinate bench has held that such activities of Dharmashala cannot be said to be carried out in the nature of trade, commerce or business. The coordinate bench in that judgment relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in 133 ITR 470 and Hon'ble Supreme Court in 121 ITR . It has further been held in ICAI v. Dy. CIT (Exemption) 202 Taxman 1 that a very broad and extended definition of the term business is not intended for the purpose of interpreting and applying the first proviso to section 2(15) generally an activity would be considered a business if it is undertaken with a profit motive but it is not always determinative. Normally the profit motive test should be satisfied but even otherwise there sho....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rmore the various receipts stated to be based on the business motive are all related to educational activities of the trust therefore they cannot be looked into isolation without looking the predominant objective of the trust for which it exists. Further the courses offered by the trust institute are recognized courses of various universities and it is not private coaching classes but recognized courses. Therefore the objection of the revenue that it is fees received for professional coaching does not sustain. Further the fees charged by the assessee it is alleged that does not offer any discount to needy people. The claim of the revenue is that assessee has to demonstrate that it exists for the poor and needy people. We do not subscribe to that view as while reading the provision of section 2 (15) no such condition is available. According to that section charitable purposes includes 'education' in its literal meaning. If the trust is providing education it carries on charitable activity, hence we reject this argument of the revenue. In view of this, the reliance placed upon by the ld Assessing Officer on the decision of the Uttarakhand High Court is incorrect. The Next iss....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ned in section 13(2)(g) read with section 13(3)(e) of the Act and therefore, the trust loses the exemption of its income in its entirety. It is as claimed by assessee that it has 9 vehicles out of which six vehicles are registered in the name of the trustees or Managers of the trust or its various branches. Three of them are the scooters; all of them are purchased in the earlier year. The ld Assessing Officer has applied the provisions of section 13(2)(g) of the Act to say that any income or property of the trust shall be deemed to have been used or applied for a benefit of a person its income or property of the trust or institution is diverted during the previous year in favour of any person referred to in sub-section (3). We have carefully considered the claim of the assessee as well as the reasons given by the ld AO. According to provision of section 13 of the Act provides that provision of section 11 does not apply in those situations. The claim of the revenue in the present case is that in this case according to provision of section 13(2)(g) if any income or property of the trust is diverted during the previous year in favour of any person referred to in section 13(3) than suc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....appellant, is an anonymous donation as the receipt does not show the complete name and address of the donor. The ld AR has stated that the complete name and address of the donors is placed at pages No 286 to 340. We have carefully considered the rival contention of this aspect and perused the relevant documents placed at pages No 286 to 340 of the paper book. In these papers, assessee has tabulated the name, address, date, and amount of donation received. In view of this we do not find any infirmity in the order of ld CIT (A) in holding that such voluntary contribution cannot be said to be anonymous donation. However on verification of the details submitted by the assessee it shows such total donation at Rs. 39,68,455/- whereas the ld AO has computed such donation at Rs. 4081528/-. In view of it, this ground is set aside to the file of the ld AO to reconcile difference of Rs. 113073/- with the donation list given by the assessee and amount of donation computed by him. In the result ground No 6 to the extent of only Rs. 113073/- is set aside to verify whether the assessee has name and address of such donors available with it or not. The ld AO is directed to provide proper opportunit....