9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Whether the income from casual members amounts to commercial activity u/s 11(4A) of the Income Tax Act. 2. Whether the assessee club qualifies for exemption u/s 12A of the Income Tax Act. Issue 1: Income from Casual Members as Commercial Activity The Assessing Officer (AO) observed that the assessee, a Golf Club, received Rs. 67,84,182/- as fees from casual members, who were charged higher rates than permanent members and were not eligible for other facilities. The AO treated this as a commercial activity and invoked provisions of Section 11(4)/11(4A) of the Act, rejecting the exemption u/s 11 for this amount, treating it as business income. The AO allowed 25% of these receipts as expenses incurred for earning such income. The CIT (A) disagreed with the AO, stating that the casual membership fee was for allowing the public to play golf, aligning with the club's objective of promoting golf. The CIT (A) noted that the assessee fulfilled the requirements of Section 2(15) and Section 12A of the Act, and thus, the benefit u/s 12A could not be denied. The CIT (A) referenced the CBDT Circular No. 395 and the Supreme Court decision in Radhasoami Satsang Vs. CIT to support this view, leading to the deletion of the addition made by the AO. The ITAT upheld the CIT (A)'s decision, agreeing that the casual membership fees were part of the club's charitable activities and not a separate business activity. The ITAT emphasized that the club's activities were consistently recognized as charitable, and the casual membership fees were integral to the club's functioning. Issue 2: Exemption u/s 12AThe High Court noted that the club had been consistently recognized as a charitable institution since its establishment in 1950, with its main object being the promotion of golf. The club had been granted exemption under Section 10(23) from 1967 to 1998 and under Section 12A from 1999 onwards. The department had accepted the club's charitable status in previous and subsequent assessment years, except for the year in question. The High Court observed that the AO's undue focus on casual membership fees was misplaced, as this aspect had been previously examined and accepted by the department. The court highlighted that the casual membership fees were part of the club's overall activities and were utilized for promoting golf, aligning with the club's charitable objectives. The High Court agreed with the ITAT's reasoning that the casual membership fees were not a separate business activity but part of the club's charitable activities. The court emphasized that the promotion of sports, including golf, is considered a charitable activity under Section 2(15) of the Act, as clarified by the CBDT Circular No. 395. Based on these findings, the High Court concluded that no substantial question of law arose in the case and dismissed the appeal, affirming the decisions of the CIT (A) and ITAT. Conclusion:The High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the casual membership fees were part of the club's charitable activities and not a separate commercial activity. The club's exemption u/s 12A was upheld, and the AO's addition of casual membership fees as business income was deleted.
|
