9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Appeal against CIT(A)'s order for assessment year 2006-07 regarding exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) and u/s 11, acceptance of ITAT decisions, and collection of capitation fees by educational institutions.
Exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi): The Revenue contended that approval u/s 10(23C)(vi) is mandatory for societies with gross receipts over Rs. One crore. It was emphasized that section 10(23)(vi) provides for educational income exemption, not section 11. The Tribunal referred to the T.M.A. Pai Foundations case, stating that institutions collecting capitation fees cannot be considered charitable/educational. The matter was remitted to the assessing officer to determine if capitation fees were collected, emphasizing that such collections would disqualify the institution from exemptions u/s 10(23C) or u/s 11. Acceptance of ITAT decisions: The Tribunal noted that previous decisions favored the assessee, citing cases like M/s Vasavi Academy Education and St. Theresa's Society. The Tribunal referred to Supreme Court judgments in support of disallowing exemptions for institutions collecting money beyond prescribed fees. The assessing officer was directed to reevaluate the issue in light of these judgments and give the assessee a fair hearing. Collection of capitation fees: The Tribunal highlighted the need for assessing officers to investigate if educational institutions were collecting capitation fees, as per the T.M.A. Pai Foundations and Islamic Academy of Education cases. The Tribunal set aside the issue for fresh consideration, reiterating that any collections beyond prescribed fees would disqualify institutions from tax exemptions. Conclusion: The Revenue's appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, and the issue was remitted to the assessing officer for reevaluation in accordance with the Supreme Court judgments. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of assessing whether educational institutions were collecting capitation fees, as this could impact their eligibility for tax exemptions. Note: Separate judgments were not delivered by the judges in this case.
|
