9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 1540X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ization despite the fact that the assessee society was doing business within the meaning of amended provisions of S.2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee by not appreciating the fact that the income received by the assessee are contractual in nature. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the fact that TDS has also been deducted by the parties on these contractual payment but the assessee has wrongly treated these payments as sponsorship receipts. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any ground of appeal raised above at th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Country covering almost all the states of the country. 3.1 The main source of income of the assessee is, from donations, grant-in-aid, sponsorship fee, interest, income from sound system, foreign contribution, for conducting programmes, dividend and membership fee etc. The assessee has filed the nil return of income for the AY 2011-12 and the case was taken up for scrutiny. During the assessment proceedings the AO has invoked the mischief of the proviso of, section 2(15) and denied the exemption u/s 11(1) and mainly on the ground that the assessee is neither in the field of education, nor in the field of medical relief or relief to the poor and the activities carried out by the assessee fall within the scope of 'Advancement of any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vancement in the nature of general public utility and not involved, in trade, commerce or business. The assessee is very much a charitable institution and is very much eligible for exemption u/s 11(1) and the AO has not made out any specific case to show that the assessee is involved in any trade, commerce or business to attract the mischief of the Proviso of section ,2(15). 3.8 The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of India Trade Promotion Organisation vs, DGIT(E), 53 Taxmann.com 404 (Delhi) 2015 (order dated 22/01/2015) has upheld the constitution validity of the proviso of section 2(15) which was under challenge being discriminatory in view of the Article 14 (Equality-before law) of the Constitution of India but the Hon'ble ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sted by various local Chapters of the Organisation. In my view the Ld.CIT(A) was right in holding that, mere receipt of fees or some other amounts, does not mean that the assessee is involved in any trade, commerce or business. He rightly relied on the decision of the Chennai Bench of the ITAT in the case of Hansadwari vs. DIT(E) (2012) 19 Taxman.com 10, which held that advancement of traditional music and culture and conducting music programmes for that purpose, could never be considered as an activity in the nature of trade, or commerce or business u/s 2(15) of the Act. In the earlier years also this argument of the assessee was accepted by the Ld.CIT(A). In my view the Ld.CIT(A) has rightly applied the decision of the Jurisdictional High ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
