TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (7) TMI 39
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t Year 2009-10. 02. Brief facts of the case shows that assessee is a charitable trust running an Institute in the name of Institute for International Management & Technology, Gurgaon. It is registered under Section 12A of the of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). Therefore, assessee is claiming exemption under Section 11 & 12 of the Act. 03. The assessee filed its return of income at 'NIL' on 30.09.2009. During the course of assessment proceedings, according to the Assessing Officer, assessee was not carrying on educational activity in terms of Section 2(15) of the Act. Therefore, benefit of Section 11 and 12 was denied to the assessee and total taxable income of Rs. 89,07,340/- was assessed. This order travelled to the Co-ordinate B....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Thus the total income was assessed at Rs. 2,19,07,340/-. 05. The assessee aggrieved with that order preferred the appeal before the ld. CIT (Appeals), who vide para No. 7 of his order held as under :- " 7. In the order under appeal i.e. order u/s. 148 dated 25.03.2014, the AO has added the amount of Rs. 1.30 crore as revenue receipt which was shown by the assessee as addition to corpus fund still treating the assessee as AOP because the department has filed an appeal in High Court against the order of ITAT. The addition of Rs. 1.30 crore heated as revenue receipt made by the AO is not justifiable as the Hon'bie ITAT has already adjudicated that the assessee in involved in education and the benefit of Section 11/12 is to he- ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....b of "charitable purpose‟ i.e. "education‟ within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act, and therefore, was not eligible for benefit of exemption of section 11 & 12 of the Act." 2. On the facts and Circumsatnces of the case and in law, the ld CIT (A) erred in law in ignoring the assessee conducted technical education courses without the mandatory approval from all india council for technical edciation( AICTE) which is a statutory body , in violation of rule and regulation of AICTE Act. 06. We have heard the rival contentions on this appeal of the Revenue and find that the ld. CIT (Appeals) has followed order of the Co-ordinate Bench and mentioned the fact in para No. 6 of his order as under :- " 6. I have ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessee trust, as envisaged in its Trust Deed. The element of profit, as seen above would not render such charitable nature otiose. Therefore, there is no paradox in the findings recorded by the Ld. CIT(A) in firstly upholding the disallowance of business promotion and entertainment expenditure and then, holding the assessee entitled to the benefits of Section 11/12 of the I.T Act. " 07. As the ld. CIT (Appeals) has followed the order of the Co-ordinate Bench in assessee's own case for the same assessment year, wherein it has been held that assessee is entitled to exemption under Section 11 and 12 of the Income Tax Act, the ld. CIT (Appeals) followed the same. In view of this both the grounds of appeal are dismissed. 08. Now we come....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee trust is towards corpus or not. Admittedly before us no such direction of the donor was placed. On a specific query by the Bench the learned Authorized Representative submitted that the same was never asked by the lower authorities and, therefore, the same was not submitted. However, she hurriedly agreed that same would be submitted. The learned CIT (Appeals) also held that there is no letter of confirmation from the donor that the amount of donation is for the corpus fund and neither the receipt issued by the assessee say that the amount of donation is towards corpus of the trust. The learned Departmental Representative did not raise any serious objection to the fact that if the assessee produces a direction of the donor i.e. Unitech ....