9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 1124X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,200/- on the basis that it was not entitled to exemption u/s 11. ii) The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that- (a) The appellant was exclusively operating the Gymkhana for sports activities like swimming, squash, badminton, cricket and table tennis etc. as per detailed facts given in the statement of facts. (b) The sports and recreation also fall within the meaning of modern concept of education. (c) The appellant was therefore for the object of education as per the first three objects defined in charitable purpose and therefore the proviso to Section 2(15) applying only to 4th object of general public utility did not apply. (d) The A.O therefore wrongly assessed the appellant under proviso to Section 2(15). II. i) The A.O wrongly assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xemption. 4. Before us the Ld. A.R of the assessee has submitted that the assessee trust has been created with the object to provide its member the facility for games, sports, indoor and outdoor and to provide amenities associated therewith. Apart from this the object of the trust also include to provide its member all advantages, convenience and amenities of social nature to promote manage/assist in the promotion and management of all formations of sports and game, general advancement and physical culture and social activities. He has further submitted that the promotion of game and sport is considered to be a charitable purpose within the meaning of Section 2(15) of the income Tax Act. In support of his contention he has relied upon the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld. A.R has further contended that the proviso to Section 2(15) is not applicable in the case of the assessee as the assessee is carrying out the charitable activity which falls under the term education. He has further contended that the object of the assessee trust itself is not business activity and the activities of bar and restaurant are only in advancement of the object of the trust, therefore, these activities are incidental to the main object. Alternatively, the Ld. A.R has submitted that the income from the activities which are treated as business are incidental to achieve objects of the trust falls u/s 11(4A) of the Income Tax Act. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. D.R has submitted that post amendment to Section 2(15) the activity of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntral), 343 ITR 23 held that the DIT had such power. Therefore, this ground of appeal is dismissed." 7. As it is clear from the finding of the CIT(A) that the issue was decided solely on the basis of withdrawal/cancellation of registration u/s 12A without going into the issue of applicability of proviso to Section 2(15) of the Act. Since, the registration u/s 12A has been restored by the Tribunal vide order dated 10.7.2013 therefore, we set aside the impugned order of the CIT(A) and remit the matter to the record of the CIT(A) to decide the issue on merits and particularly on the question of applicability of proviso to Section 2(15) of the Act. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
