9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (8) TMI 1158X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 809, 915 916(B)/2007 for the assessment years 2004-05, 200-01 1999-2000 in assessee s own case, wherein a similar issue was decided in favour of assessee. 3. Section 10(23C)(iiiab) reads as under: Any university or other educational institution existing solely for the educational purposes and not for the purpose of profit and which is wholly and substantially financed by the Government . 4. The section 10(23C)(iiiab) provides that where the aggregate receipts of the University or other educational institution are more than ₹ 1.00 Crore and such educational institution is wholly and substantially financed by the Government, it would be exempt under this section. 5. The word Whole or substantial is nowhere defined in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubstantial is considerable , for most part and mainly . Hence, if considerable finance is provided by the Government then such a situation will be covered by Section 10(23C)(iiiab) the IT Act. The worthy Supreme Court in the case of Santosh Hazari Vs Purushotham Tiwari reported in 25 ITR 84 had an occasion to consider the meaning of the word substantial as mentioned in Sec.260A of the IT Act. The worthy Supreme Court held that the word substantial as qualifying question of law means having substance, essential, real, of sound worthy, important or considerable. The Hon ble Supreme Court held that the question of law will be a substantial question of law where there is a room for difference of opinion. Hence, if the chances of inter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been considerably met by the Government looking to the quantum of Government grant received in the instant case for the assessment years under consideration, we feel that the learned CIT(A) was justified in holding that the Educational Institution under consideration has been substantially financed by the Government. The learned CIT(A) held justified by the ITAT in holding that the income is exempt u/s 10(23C)(iiiab) of the IT Act . The aforesaid decision has not been interfered by the Hon ble High Court in ITA Nos.186 187/2007 dated 29th November, 2007 and 17th December 2007 respectively. 8. Facts and issue being similar, so following the same reasoning, we are not inclined to interfere with the findings of the CIT(A) who has held ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
