2018 (4) TMI 643 - AT - Income Tax

Denying exemption U/s.11(l)(a) and S. 11(2) - proof of charitable activities - Held that - The Director and the secretary are required to be appointed with the prior approval of MOC and I, Govt of India. Assessee institute receive grants from the Govt. under plan fund. Clauses 38 and 39 of MOA which demonstrate that Income and Property of Institute has to be applied only towards promotion of objects of the assessee and that assessee cannot declare dividends. Further, in event of winding up of the Institution nothing will be paid or distributed to the members of the assessee institute. Assessee institution carries on activities of education, research and development, consultancy, laboratory research including testing and certification in relation to packaging at concessional rates to cover its recurring costs and future costs. The capital costs are usually met from grants of the government. Hence, there appears to be no profit motive, and surplus if any is nothing but recovery of future costs to be incurred by the assessee Institution for achieving its objects. Keeping in view the activities already undertaken by the assessee it appears that both the lower authorities have not properly appreciated actual activity being undertaken by the assessee and invoked provisions u/s.2(15) for declining the claim of exemption u/s.11. In the interest of justice, we restore the matter back to the file of the AO for deciding afresh after considering above observations. We direct accordingly.

Issues:
1. Denial of exemption under section 11(l)(a) and 11(2) by applying proviso to section 2(15).
2. Inclusion of life membership subscription as income.
3. Inclusion of subscription received under Post Graduate Scholarship program as income.
4. Inclusion of Government Grants-Plan fund as income.
5. Dispute regarding acceptance of proposed taxable income by Assistant Director.
6. Assessment of activities as trade and commerce leading to denial of exemption under section 11.

Analysis:
1. The appellant challenged the denial of exemption under section 11(l)(a) and 11(2) by invoking the proviso to section 2(15). It was argued that the proviso should not apply as the appellant operates without a profit motive for charitable purposes. Citing relevant cases, it was emphasized that where activities are conducted without a profit motive, the proviso to section 2(15) should not be applicable. The Tribunal found that the lower authorities did not properly appreciate the appellant's activities and directed the matter to be reconsidered by the Assessing Officer.

2. The inclusion of life membership subscription as income was contested by the appellant on the grounds that it is of a capital nature and not liable to tax. The Tribunal did not find merit in the revenue's argument and allowed the appeal, directing a fresh assessment considering the nature of the receipt.

3. Similarly, the inclusion of subscription received under the Post Graduate Scholarship program as income was challenged by the appellant, arguing that it is capital in nature and not taxable. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant's contention and allowed the appeal for statistical purposes.

4. The appellant disputed the inclusion of Government Grants-Plan fund as income, claiming it to be capital in nature and not liable to tax as it was received for the acquisition of specific assets under the Plan fund scheme. The Tribunal, after considering the arguments, allowed the appeal and directed a fresh assessment by the Assessing Officer.

5. In the assessment for the previous year, the appellant contested the conclusion that the Assistant Director had accepted the proposed taxable income. The Tribunal found this conclusion contrary to the records and directed a reconsideration of the exemption claimed by the appellant.

6. The Assessing Officer denied exemption under section 11 by categorizing the appellant's activities as trade and commerce. However, the Tribunal observed that the appellant operates for charitable purposes without a profit motive. The Tribunal noted the appellant's establishment as a charitable organization and its activities aligned with charitable objectives. The matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision considering the appellant's charitable nature and activities.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeals of the appellant for statistical purposes, directing a fresh assessment by the Assessing Officer in light of the observations made regarding the charitable nature of the appellant's activities and the incorrect application of provisions by the lower authorities.

← Previous Next →