TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (11) TMI 1574
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nfirming the order of learned Assessing Officer is bad in law and contrary to facts to the extent of non-providing of exemption u/s 10(23C) (iiiad) of the Income Tax Act to the assessee in respect of receipt of tuition fee and other levies, for which he is entitled. 2. The order of the learned Assessing Officer is unlawful and contrary to facts to the extent that the benefit of exemption of Section 10(23C)(iiiad) are not available to the society wrongly interpreting the provision of the Act & upholding that the education imparted by the institution was not akin to the university or similar institution and the society was not existing solely for educational purposes and is increasing its assets year by year by investing its excess of inco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ncome Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act), and hence, its income has been claimed exempt. It was further submitted that the school M/s Queens Public School is owned by Queen's Educational Society which is registered under Societies Registration Act by the Registrar of Societies, Uttranchal. The source of income/receipts of the institution is fee from students which are wholly spent on imparting education to the students. Assessee, has thus, argued that its claim of exemption U/s 10(23C)(iii)(ad) of the Act may be allowed and assessment may be made at nil income. 2.1 The A.O. relying upon the earlier order of the Uttrakhand High Court has held as under:- "8. From the above discussion it is clear that the main object of the society is to e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by relying on the order of the Hon'ble Uttrakhand High Court (Jurisdictional High Court), has dismissed the appeal of the assessee by holding as under:- "3.2 The findings of Ld. AO and the averments of Ld. AR have been considered. The facts of this case remain the same on the basis of which the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court has given its verdict against the Appellant in the Asstt. Years 2000-01 and 2001-02. Thus, this Appellate Authority is unable to be persuaded to agree with the foreceful arguments advanced by the Ld. AR for taking a contrary view. Accordingly, the action of Ld. A.O. is upheld and these grounds dismissed especially since the material facts have not been altered since A.Yrs 2000-01 and 2001-02 and the issue is cove....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t, in S.RM.M.CT.M. Tiruppani Trust v. Commissioner of Income Tax, (1998) 2 SCC 584, this Court in the context of benefit claimed under Section 11 of the Act held: "9. In the present case, the assessee is not claiming any benefit under Section 11(2) as it cannot; because in respect of this assessment year, the assessee has not complied with the conditions laid down in Section 11(2). The assessee, however, is entitled to claim the benefit of Section 11(1)(a). In the present case, the assessee has applied Rs. 8 lakhs for charitable purposes in India by purchasing a building which is to be utilised as a hospital. This income, therefore, is entitled to an exemption under Section 11(1). In addition, under Section 11(1)(a), the assessee c....