TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (11) TMI 119
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sed income at NIL from charitable activity as against the claimed of the appellant at (-) Rs. 2,30,77,383/-. 2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in taking income from charitable activity at NIL as against Ld. AO's own action in treating the application at Rs. 16,67,85,363/- and thus Ld. AO ought to have computed the income from charitable activity at (-) Rs. 3,06,53,738/- (Rs. 16,67,85,363 - Rs. 13,61,31,625). 3. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in not allowing the depreciation Rs. 2,33,30,470/- on the ground that investment in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ostel facilities to the students. It is registered with Registrar of societies as well as under section 12AA of the IT Act. Assessee filed its return of income declaring nil income. The case was selected for scrutiny. In the assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer noticed that assessee, in addition to educational activities, also provide hostel facility to the students in its college. After seeking the explanation of the assessee, the Ld. AO was of the view that generating of surplus on account of hostel running or any other activity falls under business category, which is incidental to the business. Therefore according to him the hostel running itself is not an educational activity and can at the most be said to be incidental to the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ty, after considering the submissions of the assessee and various decisions, dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. The ground No. 01 & 02 was not pressed by the asseseee. Ground No. 7 is consequential and ground No. 8 us general in nature. Therefore, these grounds do not require any specific adjudication. 5. On ground Nos. 3, 4, 5 & 6, assailing the impugned order, the ld. AR submitted that both the issues pertaining to hostel expenses and depreciation are squarely covered by the decision of co-ordinate Bench in the case of Kanha Charitable Trust vs. Addl. CIT (ITA No. 3297 & 5987/Del/2015 - A.Yrs. 2010-11 and 2011-12) dated 24.11.2017, wherein the Tribunal after considering var....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Unity Hospital (P) Ltd. vs. State of Kerala (WA No.1648/2009 - dated 21.12.2010 (Ker). (xvi). DDIT(E) vs. Willingdon Charitable Trust (2007) 107 ITD 493 (ITAT Chennai) (xvii) Anjuman-E-Khyrkhah-E-AAM vs. DIT (E) (2012) 49 SOT 242 (ITAT Chennai) (xviii).Society for Advance Health Education vs. CIT (2013) 145 ITD 257 - ITAT, Agra) (xix). CIT & Anr. Vs. Children's Education society (2013) 358 ITR 373 (Kar. HC) (xx). Delhi Public School Ghaziabad vs. ACIT (ITA No. 3593/Del/2015 - dated 08.05.2018. 6. The ld. DR, on the other hand, opposing the contention of assessee, relied on the orders of the authorities below. 7. Having considered the rival submissions and gone through the entire material on record, we find that the issues and ad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... High Court in CIT versus Karnataka Lingayat education society in ITA No. 5004/2012 dated 15/10/2014 wherein it has been held that providing hostel to the students/staff working for the society‟s incidental to achieve the object of providing education, namely the object of the society. In view of this we are of the opinion that providing of hostel facilities and transport facilities to the student and staff member of the educational Institute cannot be considered as business activity but is subservient to the object of educational activities performed by the society. We are also supported by our view by the decision of the Hon‟ble Allahabad High Court in IIT versus state of UP, (1976) 38 STC 428 (All) wherein question arose in I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....efore we reverse the finding of the lower authorities and held that transport and hostel facilities surplus cannot be considered as business income of the assessee society which is mainly engaged in business activities and these activities are subservient to the main object of education of the trust. In the result Ground No. 1 - 3 of the appeal of the assessee are allowed." 13. The facts and circumstances of the case is identical to the facts before us. The ld DR could not submit a single incident where the hostel facilities and transport facilities were provided to anybody other than students and staff of the trust. In view of this, we reverse the finding of the lower authorities and held that transport and hostel facilities are part of ....