9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (3) TMI 871 - AT - Income TaxExemption u/s.11 - assessee is involved in the commercial activity and held that assessee s case falls under the last limb last of the Section 2(15) - CIT (A) held that the activities carried out by the assessee are not in the nature of trade, business or commerce or rendering services in relation to the same - HELD THAT - We hold that exemption u/s.11 could not be denied to the assessee as it is not involved in any commercial activity so as to fall within the purview of 1st proviso to Section 2(15). Accordingly, disallowances made by the Assessing Officer are deleted.
Issues:
1. Denial of exemption u/s.11 to the assessee by the Assessing Officer. 2. Whether the activities carried out by the assessee fall under the definition of trade, business, or commerce. 3. Applicability of the first proviso of Section 2(15) of the Act. 4. Disallowance of unpaid expenses by the Assessing Officer. Issue 1: Denial of exemption u/s.11: The case involved an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XL, Delhi for the Assessment Year 2012-13, denying the exemption u/s.11 to the assessee. The main contention was that the assessee, claiming to be an apex body of major ports, was involved in commercial activities. The Assessing Officer made an addition of &8377; 1,68,64,157 based on this premise. Issue 2: Nature of Activities: The Assessing Officer contended that the activities of the assessee were commercial in nature, falling under the last limb of the definition of charitable purpose u/s. 2(15) of the Act. However, the assessee argued that holding conferences, providing consultancy services, and management services were part of its main objects, provided to members on a no-profit/loss basis. The Tribunal observed that the assessee's activities did not qualify as trade, commerce, or business activities. Issue 3: Applicability of First Proviso of Section 2(15): The Assessing Officer invoked the first proviso of Section 2(15) by disallowing unpaid expenses claimed by the assessee. The Tribunal noted that the expenses were not claimed in the income and expenditure account by the assessee, and thus, there was no basis for disallowance. The Tribunal relied on judicial precedents and held that the assessee was not engaged in any activity of trade, commerce, or business, thus exempting it from the provisions of the first proviso of Section 2(15). Issue 4: Disallowance of Unpaid Expenses: The Assessing Officer disallowed unpaid expenses of &8377; 2,34,58,706, treating it as surplus derived by the assessee. However, the Tribunal found that the assessee had not claimed these expenses in its income and expenditure account. The Ld. CIT(A) had given a categorical finding that the assessee was not involved in any trade, commerce, or business activities, which was not contested by the Revenue. Therefore, the disallowance of the unpaid expenses was unjustified. In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the Revenue, holding that the exemption u/s.11 could not be denied to the assessee as it was not engaged in any commercial activities falling under the purview of the first proviso to Section 2(15). The disallowances made by the Assessing Officer were deleted, and the Tribunal upheld the decision in favor of the assessee based on legal precedents and factual findings.
|
