9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 351X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty to the needy student which falls under the educational activities and as such Proviso to sec. 2(15) of the Act is not applicable to the assessee's case. The short point involved in the case is this as to whether the hostel facilities providing to the needy students falls under the educational activities and, therefore, where the last limb the proviso to sec. 2(15) is applicable to the assessee trust. 3. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the relevant materials available on record. 4. It appears that the Co-ordinate Bench in ITA No. 993/Ahd/2017 for the A.Y. 2013-14 has also dealt with the identical issue and ultimately decided the same in favour of the assessee which has been brought to our notice by the Ld. AR. A copy of the same annexed to the Paper Book filed before us is appearing at Pages 175 to 181. 5. The Ld. DR however relies upon the order passed by the authorities below. We have carefully considered the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench as mentioned hereinabove. The relevant portion is as follows:- "6. Short question required to be adjudicated by the Tribunal is, whether providing hostel facility to the students by appellant-trust is to be c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tudents. It is one of the essential components of an educational institution. Some of the institutions like IITs, Medical Colleges provide compulsory stay in the hostel. Thus, how the AO can segregate this component from the concept of education provided in the main provision of section 2(15)? If it is accepted that hostel is just an essential part of educational institution, then all that discussions made by the AO would be irrelevant. The simple reason is that assessee-trust came into existence in the year 1947. It has been providing hostel facilities for more than 60 years. It has always been treated as a charitable institution. In the assessment year 2010-11 a scrutiny assessment was made. Its status of "charitable institution" was accepted even after introduction of section 2(15) in the statute book. Not only it has been treated as "charitable institution" by giving registration under section 12AA of the Act, but under section 80G(5) it has again been recognized as "charitable institution". 7. Let us take note of reasons assigned by the AO. When the assessee has pointed out that it has been granted registration under section 12AA and 80G(5) of the Act, then the AO has observ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and 12." Taking into consideration the ratio laid down by the Co-ordinate Bench we have no hesitation to find the assessee activities towards providing hostel facilities to the student is purely an educational activities and, therefore, not coming under the proviso to Sec. 2(15) of the Act. Hence, the Ld. AO is directed to give relief to the assessee on this issue. With the observation made hereinabove, the assessee's appeal is allowed. 6. In the result, assessee's appeal is allowed. 7. Before parting we would like to make certain observation relating to the issue cropped up under present scenario of Covid-19 pandemic as to whether when the hearing of the matter was concluded on 04.03.2020 the order can be pronounced today i.e. on 30.06.2020. The issue has already been discussed by the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of DCIT vs. JSW Ltd. (ITA Nos. 6264 & 6103/Mum/2018) pronounced on 14.05.2020 in the light of which it is well within the time limit permitted under Rule 34(5) of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 in view of the following observations made therein: "7. However, before we part with the matter, we must deal with one procedural issue as well. While hearing o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of three months from the date case is closed for judgment". In the ruled so framed, as a result of these directions, the expression "ordinarily" has been inserted in the requirement to pronounce the order within a period of 90 days. The question then arises whether the passing of this order, beyond ninety days, was necessitated by any "extraordinary" circumstances. 9. Let us in this light revert to the prevailing situation in the country. On 24th March, 2020, Hon'ble Prime Minister of India took the bold step of imposing a nationwide lockdown, for 21 days, to prevent spread of Covid 19 epidemic, and this lockdown was extended from time to time. As a matter of fact, even before this formal nationwide lockdown, the functioning of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal at Mumbai was severely restricted on account of lockdown by the Maharashtra Government, and on account of strict enforcement of health advisories with a view of checking spread of Covid 19. The epidemic situation in Mumbai being grave, there was not much of a relaxation in subsequent lockdowns also. In any case, there was unprecedented disruption of judicial wok all over the country. As a matter of fact, it has been su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... down was in force. We must factor ground realities in mind while interpreting the time limit for the pronouncement of the order. Law is not brooding omnipotence in the sky. It is a pragmatic tool of the social order. The tenets of law being enacted on the basis of pragmatism, and that is how the law is required to interpreted. The interpretation so assigned by us is not only in consonance with the letter and spirit of rule 34(5) but is also a pragmatic approach at a time when a disaster, notified under the Disaster Management Act 2005, is causing unprecedented disruption in the functioning of our justice delivery system. Undoubtedly, in the case of Otters Club Vs. DIT [(2017) 392 ITR 244 (Bom)], Hon'ble Bombay High Court did not approve an order being passed by the Tribunal beyond a period of 90 days, but then in the present situation Hon'ble Bombay High Court itself has, vide judgment dated 15th April 2020, held that directed "while calculating the time for disposal of matters made time-bound by this Court, the period for which the order dated 26th March 2020 continues to operate shall be added and time shall stand extended accordingly". The extraordinary steps taken suo m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
