TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (10) TMI 705
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed to as 'Act'). 2. The appeal of the assessee was time barred by one day. In its application for condoning the delay, the assessee has stated that it had dispatched the appeal by post one day before the last day of filing appeal and on account of the time taken to deliver the same, there occurred a delay of one day in filing the appeal. Copy of the postal receipt, as evidence of dispatching the appeal in time, was filed before us. The Ld.DR did not object to the same. 3. Considering the reasonableness of the cause for the delay as also the shortness of the delay, the same was condoned in open court and the hearing of the appeal proceeded with. 4. The facts relating to the case, as emanate from the order of the Ld.CIT(E) are tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng that the assessee was existing only for making surplus was incorrect on facts and that the provisions of section 13(1)(c) of the Act were attracted was an irrelevant consideration for the grant of approval, since it was relevant only for purposes of claim of exemption u/s 11 of the Act . 7. Ld.DR on the other hand relied on the order of the Ld.CIT(E). 8. We have heard the rival contentions. We have also gone through the order in challenge before us notably the findings of the CI T(E) which are as under: "7. On 19.09.2017, a response was received through email from [email protected] in response to above noted queries stating that the society is solely engaged in providing education and hence qualifies for exemption u/s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rusal of the submissions revealed that applicant has failed to provide the Receipts and Payment account for the last three years including the Receipt and Payment account, Income & Expenditure Account and balance sheet for the F.Y. 2016-17 which were specifically called for. In the absence of same it could not be ascertained whether the certain entries taken directly to the balance sheet required to included in the Aggregate receipts or not. (iii) Further perusal of the submissions reveals that the documents/financials provided by the applicant were not in sync. This issue is evident from the following facts:- (a) Society Registration Certificate was in the name of applicant i.e. "Aradhana Public School Education Society".....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3.2016 was Rs. 96,700/- and Rs. 75,450/- as on 31.03.2015 which is again doubtful to the extent that as per rent agreement the monthly rent was 12,000/- P.M. in that way the Rent needs to be booked at 1,44,000/- 8. Given all of the above the claims of the applicant for approval u/s 10(23C) can't be ascertained. The applicant society doesn't qualify for the label educational institution in the spirit envisaged in the decision in the case of Pinegrove International. The society generically has been formed for advancement of education. It can't be said that the school has been registered as society in the present case. Taking all the aforesaid into consideration it would be relevant to mention that the twin prime condition....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....i) of the Act. As pointed out by the Ld.CIT(E) himself in para 4 of the order, that for the purpose of grant of approval under the said section, the applicant needs to specify that it exists solely for educational purposes and not for the purpose of profit. From the entire order of the CIT(E) we find that there is no examination on the aspect of existence of the assessee for imparting education. There are no findings as to how the school was established by the society. Whether affiliation was granted to the school by any Board of Education, if so, the number of students being taught in the school and teachers therein, their qualifications and such other aspects to completely bring out the fact of the society existing solely for the purpose ....