TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 167X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... therefore the benefit of Section 11 cannot be extended to the respondent? - HELD THAT:- As decided in own case [ 2018 (4) TMI 197 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] this objection/grievance of the Revenue has been taken up for the first time across the bar. There is no such objection taken before the authorities by the Revenue. Besides, nothing has been shown to us why it should be considered as a coaching cla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. Mr. Suresh Kumar a/w Ms. Priyanka Tiwary Sumandevi Yadav for the Appellant Mr. Nitesh Joshi a/w Mr. Sameer Dalal for the Respondent P.C.: 1. Heard Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned standing counsel, revenue for the appellant and Mr. Sameer Dalal, learned counsel for the respondent - assessee. 2. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ribunal on 11.2.2015, it was held that respondent - assessee was an institute for charitable purpose as defined under Section 2(15) of the Act. 5. On a query by the Court, Mr. Suresh Kumar submits that against the aforesaid order dated 11.2.2015, revenue had preferred an appeal before this Court which was registered as Income Tax Appeal No. 1368 of 2015. By order dated 28.3.2018, this Court had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Samudra Institute of Maritime Studies Trust (supra) to conclude that the activities which are run by the respondent-institute is an educational activity and not in the nature of running a Coaching Center or a Class. The Revenue is not able to point why it would not apply. We may also point out that the grant or refusal to grant exemption under Section 10(22) and/or (23C) of the Act cannot govern t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
