9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 281X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed u/s. 10(23C)(iiiac).
Therefore we found that apart from the grants received during the assessment year, the assessee is also receiving interest income on the unspent grants which is also a grant and in that circumstances, CIT(A) had granted the relief which is in accordance with law. The Ld.CIT(A) in his order had considered the said facts and also considered the fact that the assessee is an institute wholly and substantially managed by the Government of Karnataka and therefore they are entitled for deduction u/s. 10(23C)(iiiac).
The assessee is eligible for exemption u/s. 10(23C)(iiiac) of the Act and also u/s. 11(2) of the Act. In these circumstances, we find no merit in the contention of the Ld.DR - Decided against revenue. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee had failed to furnish Form 10 within the due date of 07.11.2017 for the assessment year 2017-18 and the provisions of Section 13(9) operates in the assessee's case; 5. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend all or any of the Grounds of Appeal before or at the time of the hearing of the appeal. 6. The Order of the Ld.CIT(A), NFAC may be set-aside and the Order of the AO may be confirmed. Assessment Year 2018-19 1. The Order of Ld.CIT(A) is opposed to facts and circumstances of the case; 2. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in granting exemption of Rs.12,63,13,824/- u/s.10(23C)(iiiac) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the assessee without appreciating the fact that the government grants received by the assessee during the fin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t u/s. 12A of the Act and during the assessment year, the assessee claimed the exemption u/s. 10(23C)(iiiac) of the Act. The AO issued notice and stated that the assessee institute has received less than 50% grant from the Government during the year in order to claim the exemption under the above section. Further, the AO had observed that the assessee had not furnished the form 10 within the due date and therefore they are not entitled to claim the exemption u/s. 11(2) of the Act. As against the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) and contended that the assessee is an autonomous body set up by the Government for diabetic treatment by providing all the infrastructure and funds and also it was wholly managed by the G ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... titled for exemption u/s. 11(2) of the Act. The Ld.AR had submitted a paper book enclosing a brief facts and notes on the issues and also filed some documents along with the case laws and contended that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) is based on the records submitted by the assessee and unless and until the revenue had produced some other records, contrary to the documents filed by the assessee, the order of the Ld.CIT(A) is in order and prayed to dismiss the appeals filed by the revenue. 5. We have heard the arguments of both sides and perused the material available on record. 6. As seen from the details furnished by the assessee, during the Assessment Year 2017-18, the assessee had received a grant of Rs. 5.63 crores. Apart from the said g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... adjudicated. The assessing officer held that the government grants received by the assessee institute were less than the 50% of the total receipts. The appellant stated that the Government grants are Rs.5.63 Crore as against the other income of the hospital at Rs.6.51 Crore. Therefore, the funds received from the Government of Karnataka were 46.37% of the total receipts of the Institute during the relevant financial year. However this other income contains interest of Rs.2,79,53,567 on term deposits. These term deposits contain unspent grants of Rs.10,69,44,621 from earlier years. Excess of income over the expenditure is not available for distribution but invested as per requirement of section 11(5) of the Act. So indirectly, the interest o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re, the assessee is entitled to the benefit of exemption under Section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Income Tax Act. In that view of the matter, fla the substantial question of law which was framed is answered in favour of the assessee. Hence it is held that the appellant is an Institution set up by the Government of Karnataka for philanthropic purposes and not for purposes of profit and is wholly or substantially financed by Government of Karnataka, and as such, the general intention for the purposes of Section 10(23C)(iliac) of the Act is fulfilled. As a result, the appeal is allowed. Similar facts are also available in respect of the A.Y. 2018-19 and the Ld.CIT(A) also considered the grants as well as the interest received from the deposits and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
