TMI Blog2013 (3) TMI 819X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssion of the issues and facts and circumstances of the case by AO. 2. The Appellant prays that the ordeer of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I Mumbai be set aside and that of AO be restored . 2. Assessee was registered as a non profit research and education organization in the field of Gemology. As per Para 6 of AO s order, it is a first non profit public Institute funded by Gem Jewellery Exports Association, Bombay and was established in 1971 for the promotion, propagation and development of science of gemstone and research studies in India. It has been conducting various educational courses in the field of gems, jewellery, designing and diamond grading process to the new entrepreneurs and gemstone traders ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rity or affiliated to any university, assessee was not an educational institution established solely for educational purpose and was therefore, not entitled to exemption . 3. Before the learned CIT (A), assessee contended that it has been conducting specialized courses for so many years and Revenue has accepted the claim of exemption under section 11 and definition of education is wide enough to include the activities of assessee. It made detailed submissions both on facts and also on law. The learned CIT (A) accepted the contentions while holding as under vide Para No.6: 6. I have duly considered the submission of the appellant AR and the facts of the case. I find that the appellant trust has been imparting education ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3 ITR 139) which was relied upon by AO to submit that the principles laid therein are in fact applicable to assessee in its favour. He also relied upon the decision of the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of National Safety Council 305 ITR 257 and also the Coordinate Bench decision in the case of Indo-American Society vs. ADIT (E) 278 ITR (AT) 49. He also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT vs. Surat City Gymkhana 300 ITR 214 to submit that further probe into the objects after registration was not permissible under the Income Tax Act. 6. We have considered the issue and examined the rival contentions. As far as the registration under section 12A is concerned, assessee was already regist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot within his domain while examining the return of assessee. If there are any violations in section 11 as prescribed under the provisions, then AO is within his rights to deny exemption. No such exercise was undertaken by AO. Therefore, we uphold the order of the CIT (A) and dismiss the grounds of the Revenue and its contentions. 8. Since the learned CIT (A) also examined the facts of assessee s objects and upheld the claim under section 11, we do not intend to discuss various case law relied upon by assessee Counsel in support of their contentions. Suffice to say, both on principles of law and on facts, AO cannot examine the objects of the Society so long as there is a valid registration under section 12A granted to assessee, as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
