2013 (5) TMI 472 - AT - Income Tax

Registration u/s 12A cancelled - eligiblity for exemption under section 11 denied - AO in view of the amended provision of section 2(15) held that the activities carried on by the assessee are in the nature of trade, commerce or business and are not for charitable purposes treating the assessee as an AOP - Held that - Assessee although an extended arm of State Government formed as a society to carry out charitable activities in the nature of general public utility is in fact providing assistance to industrial houses and entrepreneurs for setting up of industry in the State of Tamil Nadu. The assessee facilitates in providing licence, approval and permission from various Government agencies for setting up of industry in the State, for which it is charging fee. The fee charged by the assessee is not remitted to the Government treasury or exchequer. After insertion of proviso to section 2(15) the assessee has lost its character of charitable organization. The assessee is a service provider. Against assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether the activities of the assessee qualify as charitable purposes under section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Whether the assessee is eligible for exemption under section 11 of the Income Tax Act.
3. Whether the fees collected by the assessee constitute services in relation to trade, business, or commerce.
4. Whether the assessee's activities can be considered as advancement of an object of general public utility.

Analysis:

Issue 1:
The assessee, a society registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, claimed to be engaged in charitable activities. The Assessing Officer held that the activities were not for charitable purposes due to the nature of services provided. The CIT(A) upheld this view, stating that the fees collected by the assessee for services rendered to clients were related to trade, business, or commerce. This led to the assessee losing its charitable organization status.

Issue 2:
The CIT(A) observed that the fees collected by the assessee were directly related to services rendered in trade, business, or commerce, making the assessee ineligible for benefits under section 2(15) of the Act. The Tribunal agreed with this view, concluding that the assessee, by providing services for a fee, did not qualify as a general public utility. Therefore, the assessee was not eligible for exemption under section 11 of the Income Tax Act.

Issue 3:
The assessee argued that its activities were not profit-oriented and contributed to the economic development of the State, benefiting the public. However, the Tribunal noted that the assessee charged significant fees for providing services to entrepreneurs, indicating a commercial aspect to its operations. The Tribunal emphasized that the fees collected were in exchange for services to big business houses, not aligning with charitable activities.

Issue 4:
The Tribunal analyzed the nature of the assessee's services, focusing on the distinction between charitable activities and services related to trade, business, or commerce. It highlighted that the assessee's role in facilitating industrial setups, charging fees for services, and not remitting the fees to the government treasury led to the loss of its charitable organization status. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, dismissing the appeal due to the assessee's activities being deemed as service provision rather than charitable endeavors.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the order of the CIT(A) and dismissed the appeal of the assessee, as the activities were considered as services in relation to trade, business, or commerce, leading to the loss of charitable organization status and exemption under the Income Tax Act.