Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2008 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2008 (5) TMI 370 - AT - Income TaxEligibility of Exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiab)/(vi) - Educational Institution - Institute is wholly and substantially financed by the Government or not - grants received from the Government and the balance amount is generated by the Institute out of fees and other income - fees collected exceed the grants received from the Government - fees received and credited in the Consolidated Fund of India. HELD THAT:- This Bench in the case of Bangalore University held that in case in a year fees collected from students exceed the grants received from the Government will not render it outside the purview of being an educational institution existing solely for the education purpose. The fact that the university was being hitherto run by the Government funds cannot be ignored. The Tribunal allowed exemption to Bangalore University u/s. 10(23C)(iiiab). The ratio of law as laid down in that judgment is squarely applicable. From the figures as appearing in the balance sheet, it is clear that the finance has been provided by the Government and it cannot be said that the institute is not substantially financed by the Government. Therefore, we have no hesitation to hold that the institute is substantially financed by the Government. On Perusal of the letter from the Ministry of HRMD to the Director, IIM. It is clear that the revenue generated by the institute belongs to the Consolidated Fund of India and the Government after a conscious decision has permitted the IIMs to retain and spend the revenue so generated for their maintenance and growth. Thus, the fees which are being received and credited in the Consolidated Fund of India are made available to the institute by the Government as per power conferred to the Government under Art. 266(3) of the Constitution. This makes it abundantly clear that finances are provided by the Government. Income of an educational institution is exempt if it is existing solely for educational purposes and wholly and substantially financed by Government u/s 10(23C)(iiiab). In other cases, i.e., if it is not wholly and substantially financed by Government, the income is exempt u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) if receipts are less than one crore and exempt u/s 10(23C)(vi) if receipts exceed one crore. Eligible for exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi), the institute is to be approved by prescribed authority. The institute applied for approval u/s 10(23C)(vi) as the Revenue was taking a stand that income is not exempt u/s 10(23C)(iiiab). The application for notification u/s 10(23C)(vi) was not processed as according to the AO, the case of the assessee fell u/s 10(23C)(iiiab). Now the Revenue cannot take a different stand. It cannot be visualized that the case of the assessee will fall neither u/s 10(23C)(iiiab) nor 10(23C)(vi). Once application u/s 10(23C)(vi) was not preceded then it is to be held that the case of assessee falls u/s 10(23C)(iiiab). The Revenue cannot be permitted to blow hot and cold. Therfore, we hold that the learned CIT(A) was justified in holding that income of institute is exempt u/s 10(23C)(iiiab) and the appeal of Revenue is dismissed.
|