Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2014 (12) TMI 14

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that the society was only carrying on educational activities – relying upon C.P. Vidya Niketan Inter College Shikshan Society Vs. Union of India & Ors.[2013 (7) TMI 367 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] wherein it has been held that the mere presence of objects in the memorandum providing for other charitable activities would not disentitle a society to claim approval u/s 10 (23C) (vi), where it is established that the institution is, in fact, carrying on only educational activities - the order accepts the fact that the activities of the assessee are restricted only to education - the mere fact that a fee is being charged from B Ed students would not establish that the institution exists for profit – thus, the rejection of the application for exempti .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... plication was rejected on 31 August 2010, which led to the filing of an earlier writ petition (Writ Petition No. 1714 of 2010). In the interregnum, the petitioner filed an application for registration under Section 12AA which was allowed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Aligarh by an order dated 27 June 2011 read with a subsequent order dated 26 July 2011 effective from assessment year 2011-12. The earlier writ petition was allowed by an order of the Division Bench dated 4 July 2013 and while quashing the order passed by the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, proceedings were remitted back to the authority for a fresh decision in accordance with law. On remand, the application has been rejected by the impugned order dated 10 October 2013. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... und or trust or institution or any university or other educational institution or any hospital or other medical institution, as the case may be, and the prescribed authority may also make such inquiries as it deems necessary in this behalf. The submission which has been urged on behalf of the petitioner is that the primary requirement is whether the university or educational institution exists solely for educational purposes and not for the purposes of profit. Moreover, under the second proviso, the prescribed authority has, upon enquiry, to satisfy itself about the genuineness of the activities of the institution. In the present case, it has been urged that the Chief Commissioner has not applied his mind to the substantive requirement .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tances, we are of the opinion that as of now the petitioner society running educational institution by the name of C.P. Vidya Niketan Inter College at Kaimganj, Distt. Farrukhabad imparts education to students from Class VI to XII, in the absence of any allegation or material, the object clause providing for other charitable activities, would not disentitle the society from approval under Section 10 (23C) (vi) of exemption. The proviso added to Section 10 (23C) (vi), specially Proviso 2, 3, 12 and 13, give sufficient powers to check the abuse of the exemption. The mere possibility, therefore, that the society may in future pursue activities, which are not charitable, or closely connected with education for making profit, would not constitut .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 1,980/-. This aspect, which is of relevance, has not been considered in the impugned order. The submission of the petitioner before the Court is that the institution is subject to regulations of NCTE and does not charge any fees in excess of what is prescribed under the regulations of the affiliating university. In this view of the matter, we are of the view that the rejection of the application for exemption under Section 10 (23C)(vi) has been done in a rather casual manner without the Chief Commissioner applying his mind to the essential ingredients of the provision. At this stage, we may also observe that the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has stated before the Court that the petitioner is ready and willing t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates