Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (9) TMI 608 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - According to the CIT services rendered by the appellant society did not qualify as ‘charitable purpose’ within the meaning of Section 2(15) - objective with which such activities is conducted by the assessee/appellant society - activity of the appellant society which involved working as an interface for arranging employment/placement for the ex-service men in the form of security personnel / guards / labour - HELD THAT:- The assessee society helps ex-servicemen who are financially & educationally weak to obtain fruitful employment. In this case, neither huge capital investment is required nor any profits and gains are expected to be earned. When the assessee society act as an interface and obtains employment/placement for exservice men in form of security guards, house-keepers etc. in an organized manner, the underlying intention is to ensure that ex-servicemen are gainfully employed by reputed organizations and they are not deprived of making a decent living post retirement. As a result of the activities conducted by the assessee society, the ex-servicemen earn a decent livelihood by engaging themselves in such jobs without middlemen and exploitation, through the guidance of the assessee society. Activities in the above nature cannot be treated as activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business as contemplated in proviso to section 2(15). CIT(E) has characterized the activities of the assessee trust as commercial in nature without going into the circumstances in which the activities are carried on by the assessee society. See SURAT ART SILK CLOTH MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION (AND OTHER REFERENCES) [1979 (11) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT] Factual matrix of the assessee’s case in the year under consideration was same as in the past. If the same set of activities were considered by the Revenue to be charitable in nature then there was no reason for the AO to depart from the view regularly followed in the past. At the time when the AO passed the order u/s 143(3) allowing the assessee benefit of exemption u/s 11 of the Act, it cannot be said that the view followed by him was ‘unsustainable in law’ so as to constitute the order u/s 143(3) to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue for the purposes of Section 263 Activity of the appellant society which involved working as an interface for arranging employment/placement for the ex-service men in the form of security personnel / guards / labour in different organizations was in consonance with its aims & objectives. - Decided in favour of assessee
|