TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (2) TMI 966
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the Appellant's case. 2. The show cause notice issued under section 263 of the Act and consequent to order passed under section 263 of the Act is bad in law and without jurisdiction on various reasons on the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) has grossly erred in revising the order passed by the learned Assessing officer without appreciating that there is no error, much less prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue to warrant a revision and therefore the order passed by the learned CIT (E) is ultra vires to the scope of Section 263 and requires to be cancelled under the facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case. The direction to make fresh assessment amounts to ordering for making fishing and roving enquires without any material in support thereof and consequently the impugned order passed is bad in law is liable to be cancelled. 4. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) erred in issuing the show cause notice under section 263 of the Act by stating that the appellant were getting income by way of sponsorship fee and also received money by sale of ticket in connection with the cricket ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pplicable and the appellant activities ceases to be charitable, hence the appellant is not eligible for benefits under section 11 and 12 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and without prejudice further without giving any reasons in the order passed under section 263 of the Act in respect of the above finding is not in accordance with law on the facts and circumstances of the case. 11. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) is not justified in law invoking the first limb of the proviso to section 2(15) of the Act in the notice issued under section 263 of the Act by stating that the activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business and passing the order under section 263 of the Act by invoking the second limb of the proviso to section 2(15) of the Act by holding that the activity of rendering services relation to any trade, commerce or business and consequently the order passed on different issue other than notice issued is bad in law on the facts and circumstances of the case. 12. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) is not justified in law in holding in the order passed under section 263 of the Act that the status of the appellant should have been tr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e CIT passed order u/s 263 of the I.T.Act. The CIT held, the assessee is engaged in commercial activities and since the receipts are exceeding Rs. 10 lakh, the proviso to section 2(15) of the I.T.Act are applicable, and assessee's activities ceased to be charitable. It was concluded by the CIT that assessee was not eligible for deduction u/s 11 and 12 of the I.T.Act and the status of the assessee should be treated as an A.O.P. The relevant finding of the CIT for assessment year 2012-2013 reads as follow:- "4. I have gone through the submissions made by the assessee during the course of the proceedings u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act. The submissions of the assessee are not at all convincing. As per the Memorandum of Association/Bye-laws, the main objects of the assessee are as under :- i. To instill, promote and propagate interest in cricket among the people. ii. To popularise, regulate and control cricket in the State. iii. To participate in, conduct and regulate matches and tournaments. iv. To arrange for the coaching of the players. v. To train and maintain a panel of umpires. vi. To organise and affiliate District Cricket Associations; and vii. To resort to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee has filed the present appeals before the Tribunal. 5. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted, the Cochin Bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case for assessment year 2010-2011 had held the activities of assessee would not come within the proviso to section 2(15) of the I.T.Act since the assessee was not carrying on any business, trade or commerce. Copy of the order of the Tribunal in assessee's own case in ITA No.78/Coch/2015 dated 18.12.2017 was placed on record. 6. The learned Departmental Representative supported the revisionary order of the CIT passed u/s 263 of the I.T.Act. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. The Cochin Bench of the Tribunal had held in assessee's own case for assessment year 2010- 2011 (supra) that activities of the assessee are charitable in nature and was not hit by the proviso to section 2(15) of the I.T.Act, and consequently, the assessee was entitled to exemption u/s 11 and 12 of the I.T.Act. The relevant finding of the Cochin Bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case for assessment year 2010-2011, reads as follow:- 4.6.7 In view of the aforesaid reasoning and the judicial pronoun....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nce Bill is to a similar effect. While replying in to a debate on the Finance Bill, the Finance Minister assured that genuine charitable institutions would not be brought within the ambit of Section 2(15). (viii) It is relevant to point out that the statement made by the mover of the Finance bill can be used for demonstrating the objects of the amendment. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Apex court in the case of K.P. Varghese 131 ITR Page 597. It is also well settled law that circulars issued by the Board are binding on the revenue. (ix) The assessee has a history of distinguished record in serving the cause of the sport of cricket. It has been in public focus as a premier body serving, promoting and developing the sport of cricket. As a part of its commitment, the Association is actively involved for promoting infrastructure, conducting and also participation in tournaments. (x) As per Board Circular No. 39 5 dated 24/09/1984 the promotion of sports and games can be considered to be charitable purpose. The Board Circular are binding in nature on the department. (xi) The Chennai Tribunal in the case of Tamil Nadu Cricket Association Vs. DDIT (Exemptions) (2015....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iety. The Assessing Officer got confused himself with the activity carried on by the BCCI as that of the activity carried on by the assessee-society. The material available on record shows that one-day matches, T-20 matches and Indian Premier League matches are all conducted by the BCCI and the assessee, being the host in the State of Tamil Nadu, is only providing its stadium. The assessee has also received funds from BCCI for meeting the expenditure, being the host. Therefore, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that at any stretch of imagination, it cannot be said that the assessee is conducting any business activity. The assessee is also not providing any service to any trade, commerce or industry. In those circumstances, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that proviso to Section 2(15) of the Act is not applicable to the assessee. In view of the above discussion, the assessee is eligible for exemption under section 11 of the Act for all the assessment years under consideration. Accordingly, the orders of the lower authorities for assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 are set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to grant exemption under Section 11 of the Act.....