2012 (9) TMI 1095 - HC - Income Tax

Trust - exemption u/s 11 - whether letting out the auditorium to other parties and part of the premises constitute charitable purpose? - Held that - the assessee used to charge market rates while hiring or letting out auditorium - Apart from hiring of the auditorium the assessee received rents on account of letting out some portion of its premises to M/s Benett and Coleman. That cannot be termed as unreasonable - In view of the fact that the previous orders in which the claim for the assessee to be a charitable trust was upheld we do not see any reason to interfere with the impugned order in this aspect. - appeal dismissed - exemption allowed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Exemption under Section 11 claimed by the assessee trust.
2. Allowance of expenditure towards donation.
3. Charitable activities carried out by the trust.
4. Letting out auditorium and premises for commercial purposes.
5. Interpretation of the term "application of income" for charitable purposes.

Analysis:
1. The Revenue challenged the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) granting exemption to the assessee trust under Section 11. The trust's main objective was the promotion of artistic and cultural expression through dramas, music, and education in its auditorium. The Revenue contended that the trust was engaged in commercial activities by letting out its premises and auditorium, and the expenditure towards donation was inadmissible.

2. The Appellate Commissioner allowed the trust's appeal, relying on previous orders. The Revenue's appeal to the Tribunal was also unsuccessful. The Revenue argued that letting out the auditorium did not serve a charitable purpose and the donation made was not for a charitable purpose. However, the trust cited previous ITAT orders and a judgment affirming the charitable nature of its activities.

3. The trust explained that it was formed as a Charitable Trust in 1958 with the objective of promoting artistic and cultural expression. It made its auditorium available for charitable activities like dance, drama, and music, charging nominal fees to cover running costs. The trust also supported other charitable institutions through donations. The Assessing Officer rejected the trust's contentions, but the Court found no reason to interfere based on past rulings supporting the trust's charitable status.

4. The Court noted that the trust charged nominal fees for hiring the auditorium and received rent for letting out part of its premises, which was deemed reasonable. The Court upheld the previous orders recognizing the trust as a charitable institution. The Revenue did not raise the issue of the donation in its appeal, and the Court referred to a previous ruling to support the treatment of such donations as an application of income for charitable purposes.

5. The Court dismissed the appeal, stating that there were no substantial questions of law to consider. It emphasized the wider interpretation of the term "application of income" for charitable purposes, as established in previous judgments. The Court upheld the trust's entitlement to exemption under Section 11 and the validity of its charitable activities, including letting out its premises and making donations to support cultural endeavors.