AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (9) TMI 722
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on identical grounds, but for the change in the figures. 2. Brief facts of the case, as could be culled out from the record and the contentions of the parties, are that the assessee was incorporated on 27 September 1999 as a not - for -profit company u/s 25 of the Companies Act 1956, i.e., currently Section 8 company of Companies Act, 2013 and is also registered under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act 1961 as a charitable institution; that it is an association of broadcasters established with the main object of protecting the interest of member broadcasters in the field of television broadcasting, including television viewing audiences; that being the industry body of television companies, assessee has a responsibility for ensuring avail....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... claiming exemption under section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') and the assessment was concluded under Section 143(3) of the Act while denying exemption under section 11 and 12 of the Act by invoking section 13(1)(d) of the Act, holding that neither TRAI nor MIB ever mandated the assessee to incorporate BARC as a section 25 Company i.e., as a not for profit organization, and assessee was not mandated to get registered under section 12A read with section 12AA of the Act; that the assessee in its own wisdom chose to be registered as such and be governed by section 11 and 12 of the Act and claim exemption; and that the decision in the case of Director of Income - tax vs. Alarippu (2000) 111 Taxmann 511 (Delhi) and Director of Inco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....isallowances made by the learned Assessing Officer pursuant to his disallowance of exemption under section 11 and 12 of the Act. 5. Aggrieved by such findings of the Ld. CIT(A), for the assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15, Revenue preferred these appeals on identical grounds. It is the submission of the Ld. DR that the Ld. CIT(A) missed the point that WP (C) 2489/2017 filed by the assessee seeking stay of demand, the Hon'ble Court did not decide the matter finally but directed the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the matter. He further submitted that the transaction of purchasing shares of Rs. 15 lakhs of the Broadcasting Audience Research Council and Rs. 45 Lacs by way of a share application money in it is an investment and consequently the order o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of incorporating the BARC, the recommendations of the standing committee of Parliament on information technology, the recommendations of TRP committee appointed by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, guidelines for Television Rating Agencies recommended by the TRAI in his attempt to show that it is only pursuant to the recommendations of the TRAI and the policy of the Central government, BARC was established as an industry led body and promoted by the assessee, and as a matter of fact no intention to any profits was involved in deposit of the amounts in question. 7. We have gone through the record in the light of the submissions made on either side. In his order Ld. CIT(A) considered the TRAI recommendations, objectives of incor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n of all these aspects, Ld. CIT(A) returned a finding that the assessee cannot be said to have committed any violation within the meaning of the provisions of section 11 (5) rea with section 13 (1) (d) of the Act by making the deposits in question and consequently Ld. CIT(A) directed the assessing officer to allow the benefit of assumption under section 11 and 12 of the Act. 9. There is no dispute that basing on the recommendations of TRAI and policy of Central Government, BARC was required to be established as an industry led body and promoted by the Assessee; that both assessee and BARC are 'not for profit' companies set up for meeting wider objectives of public charitable nature, namely, promotion of Television industry and viewership i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ection 25 of the Companies act, 1956, is not permitted to distribute any dividends or profits to its shareholders. More so, on liquidation, its MOA provides that any surplus left shall be transferred to another Section 25 Company undertaking similar objectives and cannot distribute any such funds to its shareholders, which establishes that the deployment of funds in BARC is not for earning any income or profit, rather only to meet the objectives of the Assessee. 12. For want of any intention to earn profit by such deployment of funds, in the light of the decisions relied upon by the assessee reported in CIT vs. Uttar Pradesh cooperative Federation Ltd AIR 1989 SC 915, CIT v. Sir Sobha Singh Public Charitable Trust [2001] 250 ITR 475 (Delhi....