9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Interpretation of provisions u/s 11 and u/s 10(23C)(iiid) for exemption, claim of depreciation, whether assessee can choose between u/s 11 and u/s 10(23C)(iiid) for exemption.
For the issue of exemption under s. 11: The assessee, a charitable institution, claimed exemption under s. 11 and s. 10(23C)(iiid). The CIT(A) rejected the alternate claim under s. 10(23C)(iiid) stating the assessee was not recognized for exemption under that section. The AO rejected the claim under s. 11. The Tribunal found that the assessee, being an approved center of IGNOU, earned receipts from educational activities. It held that the assessee, even if initially claimed under s. 11, could be considered for exemption under s. 10(23C)(iiid) at the appellate stage. The Tribunal directed the AO to consider the assessee's claim under s. 10(23C)(iiid) and provide an opportunity for further details if needed. For the issue of choice between s. 11 and s. 10(23C)(iiid) for exemption: The Tribunal deliberated on whether the assessee could choose between claiming exemption under s. 11 or s. 10(23C)(iiid). It noted that s. 11 covers all charitable institutions, while s. 10(23C)(iiid) specifically targets educational institutions. Emphasizing the specific provision for educational institutions u/s 10(23C)(iiid), the Tribunal concluded that the assessee, being primarily an educational center, should claim exemption under s. 10(23C)(iiid) rather than s. 11. It directed the assessments to be redone under s. 10(23C)(iiid) and instructed the AO to seek further details from the assessee if necessary. In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeals of the assessee for statistical purposes, highlighting the need to apply the correct provision of law, particularly s. 10(23C)(iiid), for granting exemption to the educational institution.
|
