2014 (3) TMI 250 - AT - Income Tax

Claim of exemption u/s 11 of the Act AO rejected the claim of exemption u/s 10(23C) of the Act Held that - The income from rent is rightly noted by the CIT (A) that it cannot be assessed as business income as it becomes income from house property only thus, the of CIT (A) that assessee is in the business and using the Trust for its commercial activity is not correct - as seen from the annual report placed on record, assessee had receipts of training centre receipts from State Government in addition to general donations, dividends, interests and compensation service charges - Since there is no change in the object of assessee and as assessee continue to involve itself in charitable purpose for the help of physically handicapped persons and was receiving grant in aid from Govt. of Maharashtra the AO s observations that assessee changed the memorandum of association so that fresh registration is required does not hold good thus, the order of the CIT(A) upheld Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Claim of exemption under section 10(23C) vs. section 11
2. Denial of exemption under section 11 by AO
3. Treatment of rental income and service charges
4. Validity of registration under section 12A
5. Alleged change in objects of the Trust

Analysis:
1. The appeal by the Revenue challenged the orders of the CIT (A) regarding the nature of exemption claimed by the assessee. The AO contended that the assessee claimed exemption under section 10(23C), while the assessee argued for exemption under section 11. The CIT (A) found that the assessee's claim was under section 11, not section 10, as per the return filed. This discrepancy was crucial in determining the correct nature of the exemption claimed.

2. The AO also raised concerns about the commercial activities of the assessee, particularly renting out premises and availing services, which he deemed as contravening section 11 of the Income Tax Act. The CIT (A) disagreed, stating that the rental income should be treated as income from house property, not business income. The CIT (A) highlighted the charitable nature of the Trust's activities, including education and medical help, to support the claim for exemption under section 11.

3. Regarding the treatment of rental income and service charges, the CIT (A) emphasized that these were incidental to the main charitable activities of the Trust. The AO's assertion that the Trust was engaging in commercial activities was refuted based on the meager amounts of rent and service charges compared to the overall receipts of the Trust.

4. The validity of the registration under section 12A was a crucial point of contention. The CIT (A) maintained that the Trust's registration was valid, as there were no substantial changes in the objects of the Trust. The CIT (A) distinguished previous judgments to support the validity of the registration and the continuation of the Trust's charitable activities.

5. The allegation of a change in the objects of the Trust was addressed by emphasizing that the Trust continued to operate for charitable purposes, receiving grants from the government for aiding physically handicapped persons. The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)'s order, dismissing the Revenue's grounds and affirming the Trust's eligibility for exemption under section 11.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)'s decision, emphasizing the charitable nature of the Trust's activities and dismissing the Revenue's contentions regarding the exemption claimed and the Trust's commercial activities.