TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 772X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng the assessment year 2013-2014 consisted of single window facilitation and interest on fixed deposit. AO had treated the entire income as commercial / business, falling under the first proviso to section 2(15) of the I.T.Act and denied exemption u/s 11 - AR had relied on various case laws for the proposition that when the dormant object of the assessee is not to make profit, proviso to section 2(15) of the I.T.Act does not have application. This specific plea of the assessee has not been adjudicated by the A.O. nor by the CIT(A). Therefore, we are of the view that the matter needs to be examined de novo by the A.O. Accordingly, the issues raised in this appeal are restored to the files of the A.O. The A.O. shall afford a reasonable opp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T.Act vide order dated 29.01.2016 wherein the assessee s claim of exemption u/s 11 of the I.T.Act was denied, in view of proviso to section 2(15) of the I.T.Act. The Assessing Officer s reasoning for denying the benefit of exemption u/s 11 are as follows:- (a) The assessee acts as a single window facilitation for the purpose of setting up industries in the State of Karnataka. For this service the assessee is charging a fee from the prospective investors. (b) Proviso to section 2(15) of the Act applies in the case of the assessee which does not allow to treat the assessee being engaged in charitable activities if it is involved in the carrying of any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business. (c) Second proviso to sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of paper book, the annual report of the assessee along with relevant annexures, audit report and balance sheet of the assessee, the memorandum of association, certificate of registration under 12AA of the I.T.Act, submissions made before the CIT(A) etc. are enclosed. In the second set of paper book, the case laws relied on are enclosed. The learned AR reiterated the submissions that the assessee is a charitable institution and there is no profit motive involved. It was stated that in absence of intention of any profit motive, the first proviso to section 2(15) of the I.T.Act does not apply. In this context the learned AR has relied on the order of the Tribunal in the case of Bangalore Development Authority v. Addl.CIT in ITA No.1104 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
