TMI Blog2020 (4) TMI 371X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tions or otherwise and also have the power to offer a security of any immovable or movable property or other security. The fact that there is no clause for providing free education for children coming from different social and educational backgrounds and the scholarship to under privileged children shows that there is only profit motive and the institutions are to be run only out of fees collected by admitting children s to their schools. Trust Deed also seems to indicate that the source of funds of the petitioner s trust is only from the school fees to be collected during these financial years. Therefore, it cannot be construed that the petitioner s Trust s Schools were not for the purpose of profit. No merits in these writ petitions filed by the petitioner as well Since the schools run by the petitioner were directed to be closed, pursuant to the above directions I do not find any merits in W.P. Presence of educational institution is sine qua non for grant of approval under Section 10 (23C) (vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The impugned order passed by the 1st respondent is therefore sustainable. - W.P.Nos.29475/2012, 34234/2013 & 1739/2015 and M.P.Nos.1 of 2012, 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the fee structure was not governed by the government regulations and as such it cannot be said that the objective of the petitioner s trust was Charitable in nature as has been envisaged in Section 2 (15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8. Aggrieved by the order of the 2nd respondent, the petitioner had preferred an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai. By an order dated 20.6.2011, the order dated 30.8.2010 passed by the 2nd respondent was upheld. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an appeal under Section 260 (A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is pending before the Division Bench of this Court in T.C.A.No.665 of 2011 against the said order 20.06.2011 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai. 9. The reasoning in the three impugned orders bearing reference C.No.CC. III/7/10(23C) (vi)/12-13; C.No.CC.No.III/10(23C)(vi)/13-14/8 and C.No. CC IT-III/10 (23C) (vi)/13-14/11 dated 26.9.2012, 27.9.2013 and 26.9.2014 passed by the 1st respondent namely the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai-III are identical save that in the last mentioned order , it has been mentioned that since the petition has closed down its schools, the application canno ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2008) 301 ITR 86 iii) St.Lawrence Educational Society (REGD) vs Commissioner of Income Tax Anr(2011) 53 DTR (Del)130 : (2013) 353 ITR 320 (Delhi) iv) Digember Jain Society For Child Welfare vs Director General of Income Tax (Exemptions) (2010)228 CTR (Del) 517 : (2010)329 ITR 459 v) Vanitha Vishram Trust vs Chief Commissioner of Income Tax Anr.(2010) 233 CTR (Bom) 90: (2010) 327 ITR 121 vi) City Montessori School (Regd.) vs Union of India Ors.(2009) 225 CTR (All) 188: (2009) 315 ITR 191 vii) MAA Saraswathi Educational Trust vs Union of India anr.(2010) 236 CTR (HP)400 : (2010) 46 DTR 360 viii) Pinegrove International Charitable Trust Ors. Vs Union of India Ors. (2010)230 CTR (P H)477 ix) All India Personality Enhancement Cultural Centre for Scholars, Aipes Society vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (2004) 85 TTJ (Del)514 : 91 ITD 240 (Del) x) Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax vs Bal Bharti Nursery School (2002) 76 TTJ (All) 602 : (2002) 82 ITD 71 (All) xi) Vodithala Education Society vs Assistant Director of IT (2008) 20 SOT 353 (Hyd) 15.The learned counsel specifically referred to the decision of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the petitioner are authorised to construct or acquire or take on lease or rent, buildings, land or other immovable properties from the funds of the Trust for the purposes and the objects of the Trust. 21.The relevant document that would be relied upon by the prescribed authority for the purpose of grant of approval under the aforesaid provision would be the constitution of such a person. In this case, it is the Trust Deed. It states that the objective of the petitioner s trust was to provide an organisation that supports the cause of education, including promotion and encouragement of training methods to improve the quality of education by starting institutions to support kinder gardens, primary, high and higher secondary education schools. The Board of Trustees are empowered to collect fees or charges from students and others for running educational institutions for carrying out the objects of the Trust. 22. The fact that Clause 10 of the Trust Deed states that the fees and charges shall be fixed taking into account the cost of running including future development thereof though without an element of profit motive indicates that the actual intention of the trust is only t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
