TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (4) TMI 1349
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 11-03-2016. The grounds taken by the revenue read as under: - 1. The Order of the Ld. CIT(A) is contrary to the law and facts of the case. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the assessee is eligible for exemption u/s 11 of the Act and the provisions of section 2(15) of the Act are not attracted. 3. The CIT(A) erred in holding that the assessee is eligible for exemption u/s 11 of the Act and the activities of the assessee are not 'religious' whereas the assessee has applied the money for religious purpose. 4. The CIT(A) erred in holding that the activity of sale of devotional articles was utilized for carrying ou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eral Public Utility' as per the amended provisions of section 2(15) of the Act. 2. The Ld. Sr. DR advanced arguments supporting the order of Ld. AO whereas Ld. AR referred to the findings of Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order and also referred to the decision of Tribunal in assessee's own case for earlier years. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records, our adjudication would be as under. Assessment Proceedings 3.1 The assessee earned gross total income of Rs. 620.30 Lacs and it filed return of income claiming exemption u/s 11/12 of the Act. The assessee is a registered public charitable trust u/s 12AA of the act and also approved u/s 80G(5)(vi). Upon perusal of activities of the Trust, Ld. AO noted that th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of providing education and medical relief to the poor. The assessee also referred to the favorable decision of this Tribunal for AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13. 4.2 The Ld. CIT(A) concurred that identical issue was decided favorably by the Tribunal for AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13 in ITA No.1879/Mds/2015 order dated 07-11-2016 and also in ITA No.2859/Mds/2017 order dated 10-04-2018 respectively. The relevant portion of the order for AY 2012-13 has been reproduced in the impugned order. Considering the same, Ld. AO was directed to delete the impugned addition and allow the applicable exemption to the assessee. Aggrieved, the revenue is in further appeal before us. Our findings and Adjudication 5. From the facts, it emerges that the assessee is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... case of ACIT vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (143 Taxmann.com 278), in para 173, held that such activities if carried out for nominal cost, would not be ipso fact become business. It was held by Hon'ble Court as under:- 173. It may be useful to conclude this section on interpretation with some illustrations. The example of Gandhi Peace Foundation disseminating Mahatma Gandhi's philosophy (in Surat Art Silk) through museums and exhibitions and publishing his works, for nominal cost, ipso facto is not business. Likewise, providing access to low-cost hostels to weaker segments of society, where the fee or charges recovered cover the costs (including administrative expenditure) plus nominal mark up; or renting marriage h....