TMI Blog2020 (7) TMI 278X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s to provide the registration / exemption to the appellant accordingly. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.9334/Del./2019 - - - Dated:- 8-7-2020 - Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member And Shri Kuldip Singh, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri C.S. Agarwal, Senior Advocate, Mrs. Prem Lata Bansal, Senior Advocate, Shri R.P. Mall, Advocate, Shri Madhur Agarwal, Advocate, Shri Divyanshu Agarwal, Advocate For the Revenue : Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT DR ORDER PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : - Appellant, Advocate Welfare Fund Trustee Committee (hereinafter referred to as the appellant ) by filing the present appeal sought to set aside the impugned order dated 30.09.2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income - tax (Exemption), New Delhi on the grounds inter alia that :- 1. That the Ld. CIT has erred in rejecting the application filed by the Welfare Fund u/s 12A (a) of the Income Tax Act. 2. That the Ld. CIT has erred in holding that the applicant has not established genuineness of the activities of the fund when the memorandum and other documents clearly established the same. 3. That the Ld. CIT has erred in denying the approval u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unt for AY 2018-19 were not furnished; that the ld. CIT (E) is only to satisfy the objects of the trust/institution and genuineness of its activities; that the appellant is a trustee committee called as the Advocates Welfare Fund Trustee Committee established under Bar Council of Delhi vide Notification in the official Gazette dated 25.10.2011 by the Government of India and such is a charitable institution; and relied upon the decisions rendered by Hon ble Supreme Court in the cases of CIT vs. Bar Council of Maharashtra cited as 130 ITR 28 American Hotel and Lodging Association Educational Institute vs. CBDT Ors. 301 ITR 86, Hon ble Bombay High court in Bar Council of Maharashtra vs. CIT reported in 126 ITR 27, Hon ble Kerala High Court in Sree Anjaneya Medical Trust vs. CIT 382 ITR 399 and Hon ble Punjab Haryana High Court in CIT vs. Baba Kartar Singh Dukki Educational trust (2014) 221 taxman 493 (P H) . 8. Ld. DR for the Revenue supported the order passed by the ld. CIT (E) by contending inter alia that in order to find out real purpose of the trust/institution, the basic financial statements of FY 2018-19 was required which the appellant has not furnished; that one m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inant purpose of an institution like the appellant is the advancement of the object of general public utility within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act and as such, the income from securities held by the appellant would be exempt from any tax liability u/s 11 of the Act. Operative part of the judgment (supra) is extracted for ready perusal as under :- In other words, the dominant purpose of a State Bar Council as reflected by the various obligatory functions is to ensure quality service of competent lawyers to the litigating public, to spread legal literacy, promote law reforms and provide legal assistance to the poor while the benefit accruing to the lawyer members is incidental. It is true that sub s. (2) provides that a State Bar Council may constitute one or more funds for the purpose of giving financial assistance to organise welfare schemes for the indigent, disabled or other advocates ; but it is an optional or discretionary function to be undertaken by the council. Apart from that, admittedly, the assessee council has not so far constituted any such fund for the purpose specified in the instant case. As and when such a fund is constituted, a question may arise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a profession for the benefit of lawyers community at large. Operative part of the judgment is as under :- That the expression object of general public utility was not restricted to objects beneficial to the whole of mankind. An object beneficial to a section of the public was an object of general public utility. To serve a charitable purpose, it was not necessary that the object should be to benefit the whole of mankind or even all persons living in a particular country or province. It was sufficient if the intention was to benefit a section of the public as distinguished from specified individuals. The section of the community sought to be benefited must undoubtedly be sufficiently defined and identifiable by some common quality of a public or impersonal nature: where there is no common quality uniting the potential beneficiaries into a class, it might not be regarded as valid. 16. Hon ble Delhi High Court in case of DIT vs. Foundation of Ophthalmic Optometry Research Education Centre 355 ITR 361 (Del.) has held to the extent that even if there is no commencement of charitable activities, registration u/s 12AA of the Act cannot be denied because t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
