TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 1389X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lso be exempt under section 11 as education falls within the meaning of charitable purpose under section 2(15) of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. No. 6526/Del/2013 - - - Dated:- 2-6-2016 - SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For the Petitioner : Sh. Rajesh Jain, CA For the Respondent : M s. Paramita M. Biswas, ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU : JM This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 12.9.2013 pertaining to assessment year 2010-11. 2. The following issues have been raised by the Revenue:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in ignoring that the assessee's predominant objectives are to conduct examinations for the candidates for Chartered Accountants and to regulate it's members and it does not provide any Scholastic education, therefore, its activities do not fall within the category of education covered by the definition of the expression 'charitable purpose' which is second limb of the section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. On the facts and in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order of the Assessing Officer and reiterated the contentions raised in the grounds of appeal and requested that Appeal filed by the Revenue may be allowed by setting aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A), because the activities of the assessee-society does not fall within the category of education covered by the definition of the expression charitable purpose . However, she submitted that the assessee s activity falls under the category of Advancement of any other object of general public utility . Ld. DR has further stated that Department has filed an appeal against the order of the Hon ble High Court which has been followed by the Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order while allowing the Appeal of Assessee before the Hon ble Supreme Court which is still pending, therefore, she requested that the decision of the Tribunal may be kept in abeyance till the outcome of the Hon ble Supreme Court. 7. On the other hand, Ld. Authorised Representative of the Assessee has stated that the main activities of the assesseesociety are to enroll CA students, to provide study material, to conduct classes, to conduct examination, to award degree of CA and other courses, to regular the profession of CA a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to 4. The relevant portion of his finding is reproduced as under:- 2.2 I have considered the order of the AO and the submissions of the assessee and I find the considerable merit in the submissions of the assessee that the case of the assessee is fully covered in favour of the assessee by the orders of the Ld. CIT(A), Hon'ble Tribunal and Hon'ble High Court allowing exemption to the assessee uls 11 and holding that the assessee is an educational institution. There was a similar issue of denial of exemption uls 11 and my predecessor after examining the issue has allowed exemption u/s 11 for the assessment years 2006-07, 2007-08 2009-10. The Ld. CIT (A) had allowed exemption to the assessee for the assessment year 2007-08 which has been also allowed by the Hon'ble Tribunal vide the order dated 16/06/2011 in ITA No. 1930IDel/2011 and the departmental appeal has been dismissed. The DIT(E) had denied exemption to the assessee in the proceedings uls 263 for the A.Y 2005-06 but the Hon'ble Tribunal has cancelled the order of the DIT(E) vide the order dated 18/10/2010 in ITA No. 1853/Del/2010. The department had filed appeal against the order of the Hon'ble Trib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he category of education covered by the definition of the expression charitable purpose which is second limb of the section 2(15) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Sole Trusty, Lok Shikshana Trust vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (1975) 10 ITR 234(C) wherein the Hon ble Apex Court has defined the word education and observed that the sense in which the word education has been sued in section 2(15), is the systematic instruction, schooling or training given to young in preparation for the work of life. The word education has not been used in section 2(15), is the systematic instruction, schooling or training given to young in preparation for the work of life. The word education has not been used in that wide and extended sense according to which every acquisition of further knowledge constitutes education. 3. We have heard rival arguments of both the parties and carefully perused the record placed before us. During the arguments, assessee s representative submitted copies of the decisions of ITAT Delhi H Bench in assessee s own ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... exempt u/s 11 as education falls within the meaning of charitable purposes u/s 2(15) of the Act. The relevant operative observations and findings part of this order read as under:- 4. Upon assessee s appeal Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), referred to his own appellate order for A.Y. 2006-07 as under:- I have considered the submissions made by the Ld. Authorised Representative of the appellant institution visa-vis finding of the Assessing Officer made out in the assessment order in respect of holding the income of coaching classes as an activity of business. The main emphasis of the Assessing Officer in arriving to conclusion that income of the appellant Institute from coaching classes is an activity of business, is the figure of earning from coaching classes as reflected by him in the table prepared in the assessment order giving detailed of gross income of coaching, expenditure incurred in coaching and net earning from coaching classes from assessment year 2002-03 to assessment year 2008- 09 and his remark that the appellant Institute is earning huge income over the years like any businessman earn from the activities of business. However, on the other side ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a these activities are utilized for advancement of the objectives for which the assessee has been established. Hence, ground no. 6 is allowed in favour of the appellant. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) further took note that Hon ble ITAT, Delhi Bench in ITA No. 1853/Del/2010 also held that: The institute as such merely it is receiving coaching fee from students for imparting education, cannot be said to have been carrying on the business and accordingly it is not required to maintain separate books of accounts as alleged by DIT(E). The income of the coaching classes earned by the assessee institute is within its objects and its regulations and further these activities are educational activity within the definition of section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and consequently therefore cannot be activity of business for which separate books of accounts are required to be maintained. The order of the DIT(E) is therefore not sustainable as the income of the institute is exempt not only u/s 10(23C)(iv) but also under section 11. The Institute is an educational institute and hence its income will also be exempt u/s. 11 as education falls within the meaning of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
