TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (7) TMI 641
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in facts and law in confirming the conclusion drawn by the Ld. AO that the activities of the appellant, i.e. holding of matches, sale of match tickets, receipt from booking of corporate boxes by companies, receipt of IPL subvention from BCCI, income from club facilities, receipt from sponsors etc, are of commercial nature and hence the appellant is not eligible for exemption u/s 11 & 12 as it is hit by the first proviso to section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The denial of deduction u/s 11 & 12 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on this account, merits to be set aside. ii) That the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in facts and law in confirming the conclusion drawn by the Ld. AO that the rendering of services in respect of Indian Premier League cricket (IPL) by the appellant is a business activity and hence it not eligible for exemption u/s 11 & 12 as it is hit by the first proviso to section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as well as Ld. AO has failed to appreciate the arrangement of conducting Indian Premier League cricket (IPL) matches agreed between BCCI and Kings XI Punj....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(Appeals) has erred in facts and law in confirming the conclusion drawn by the Ld. AO that the rendering of services in respect of Indian Premier League cricket (IPL) by the appellant is a business activity and hence it not eligible for exemption u/s 11 & 12 as it is hit by the first proviso to section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as well as Ld. AO has failed to appreciate the arrangement of conducting Indian Premier League cricket (IPL) matches agreed between BCCI and Kings XI Punjab and the role of appellant therein. Therefore, the conclusions drawn are not sustainable. iii) That the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on the facts in not following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble IT AT, Bench "A" judgment in the case of M/s. Tamil Nadu Cricket Association V. DDIT (Exemption) Chennai ITA No. 1535,1536 & 1537/Mds/2014 dated 14/08/2015, on similar set of facts without giving any reason for the same. iv) That the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in law by not following the judgment of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, in case of Tribune Trust V. Comm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t is not eligible for exemption u/s 11 & 12 as it is hit by the first proviso to section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The denial of deduction u/s 11 & 12 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on this account, merits to be set aside. ii) That the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in facts and law in confirming the conclusion drawn by the Ld. AO that the rendering of services in respect of Indian Premier League cricket (IPL) by the appellant is a business activity and hence it not eligible for exemption u/s 11 & 12 as it is hit by the first proviso to section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as well as Ld. AO has failed to appreciate the arrangement of conducting Indian Premier League cricket (IPL) matches agreed between BCCI and Kings XI Punjab and the role of appellant therein. Therefore, the conclusions drawn are not sustainable. iii) That the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on the facts in not following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble IT AT, Bench "A" judgment in the case of M/s. Tamil Nadu Cricket Association V. DDIT (Exemption) Chennai ITA No. 1535,1536 & ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in facts and law in confirming the conclusion drawn by the Ld. AO that the rendering of services in respect of Indian Premier League cricket (IPL) by the appellant is a business activity and hence it not eligible for exemption u/s 11 & 12 as it is hit by the first proviso to section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as well as Ld. AO has failed to appreciate the arrangement of conducting Indian Premier League cricket (IPL) matches agreed between BCCI and Kings XI Punjab and the role of appellant therein. Therefore, the conclusions drawn are not sustainable. iv) That the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on the facts in not following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble IT AT, Bench "A" judgment in the case of M/s. Tamil Nadu Cricket Association V. DDIT (Exemption) Chennai ITA No. 1535,1536 & 1537/Mds/2014 dated 14/08/2015, on similar set of facts without giving any reason for the same. v) That the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in law by not following the judgment of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Cou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons under section 11 of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the order of the AO. The assessee thus, has come before us with the captioned appeals for different assessment years. 5. Both the Ld. Representatives have stated that the identical issue as involved in these appeals has already been decided by this Bench of the Tribunal in the appellant's own case for the assessment year 2010-11 in ITA No. 427/Chd/2017 vide order dt 12.9.2019 reported in [2019] 109 taxmann.com 219 (Chandigarh-Trib.), whereby. the issue has been decided against the assessee. The Ld. counsel for the appellant-assessee has fairly admitted that the issue involved in these appeals, otherwise, has been settled by this Tribunal in the own case of the assessee for assessment year 2010-11(supra). However, he has submitted that the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in a bunch of appeals with the lead case titled as 'Director Of Income Tax (Exemption) vs Gujarat Cricket Association' reported in 2019-TIOL-2457-HC-AHM-IT has decided almost identical issue involved therein in favour of the assessees therein, upholding the order of the Ahmedabad Bench of the Tribunal passed in group of cases with the lead case 'Gujarat Cricket As....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....media right fee. (iv) The Tribunal, therefore, has observed that when the payer i.e. BCCI, itself, has not recognized the payments made by it to State Associations as voluntary grants or donations, rather the BCCI has stressed the payments have been made to the State Associations under an arrangement arrived with State Associations for sharing of the revenues from International matches and IPL, then under the circumstances, the payee or to say recipient Associations cannot claim the receipts as voluntary grants or donations at discretion from the BCCI. (v) That in the case of PCA, it has been held by the Tribunal that from the facts and evidences on the file, it is apparent that the assessee association not only being the member of the BCCI which is the AOP of the assessee along with other members, but also, is individually involved in a systematic and regular manner in commercial exploitation of the popularity of cricket matches and its infrastructure. That the BCCI in clear terms has pleaded that without the involvement of State Associations, the conduct of the IPL matches and huge revenue generation from the same is not possible. The assessee being party to the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....niently carried on in connection with the above, or calculated directly or indirectly to enhance the value or render profitable or generate better income/revenue, from any of the properties, assets and rights of the PCA;" The Tribunal therefore has observed that the above object reveals that now the assessee's activities inter alia are also directed for generation and augmentation of revenue by way of exploitation of its rights and properties. The assessee in the earlier years (before the introduction of the above revised object) might have claimed the application of income on capital assets/infrastructure as application for charitable purposes. However now with the amended objects, it may exploit the so created infrastructure for commercial purposes. The Tribunal, therefore, has observed that in its view, the introduction of the above object has brought clarity about the manner of operation and activities of the assessee. That, whereas, there is neither any reference nor any discussion about the amended objects, if any, in the case of Gujarat Cricket association(supra). 7. The Ld. counsel for the assessee at this stage has fairly admitted that the facts of the case....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he subsequent years will be liable to pay tax on such accreted income. 10. The counsel, however, has submitted that in the case of the assessee for AY 2010-11, the Tribunal inter alia has held that since the BCCI is being treated by the tax authorities as an 'AOP' only and the payments made to the State Associations as distribution of profits, hence, under the circumstances, these payments by the BCCI to the State Associations including the appellant, having already been taxed at the hands of BCCI can not be now taxed in the hands of the member of the AOP i.e. the appellant State Association as it will amount to double taxation of the same amount. The Ld. Counsel, therefore, has submitted that the said findings may be affirmed in these appeals also. Since, the matter in appeals under consideration is squarely covered with the decision arrived at by this Tribunal in the own case of the assessee for AY 2010-11 vide order dated 12.09.2019, hence, the observations made therein and the findings arrived at by the Tribunal vide order dt 12.9.2019 will apply mutatis mutandis to these appeals of the assessee. The concluding part of the order of the Tribunal dated 12.9.2019, fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd this includes a sum of Rs. 14.97 lakhs from caterer. That the assessee hosted these facilities for the purpose of recreation or one time booking for parties, functions etc. and these were commercial activities in nature as the assessee was charging fees for providing these facilities. 44. After considering the rival submissions, in our view, this issue is required to be re-examined by the Assessing officer after verification of the accounts of the assessee as to ascertain which part of the club income and catering services has been generated from the members of the assessee association and which part of the income is earned from non-members. It is also to be looked into whether the income from the club house and other facilities is generated generally from the members only and the receipt from the non-members is an exception or the income is generated from members and non-members in normal course of business. Whether the catering services are limited to the members and their guests only or the same are also provided to non-members also on commercial basis. The Assessing officer after thoroughly examining the above facts will decide if the principle of mutuality applies ....