Baroda Cricket Association, Vadodara V. The Dy. CIT, (Exemption), Circle-2, Ahmedabad

ITA 1435/AHD/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1774 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-07-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 13-06-2017
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD C BENCH (BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA. NO: 1435/AHD/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2013-14) M/S. BARODA CRICKET ASSOCIATION, BCA HOUSE 78, RACE COURSE, VADODARA, 390007 V/S DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2, AHMEDABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN: AAAAB1410E APPELLANT BY : SHRI BANDISH SOPARKAR, A. R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI O.P. SHARMA, CIT/ D.R. ( )/ ORDER DATE OF HEARING : 13-06-2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10-07-2019 PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-9, AHMEDABAD DATED 19.04.2017 PERTAINING TO A.Y. 2013-14 AND HAVE TAKEN FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 2 1. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 9, AHMEDABAD ['THE CIT(A)'] ERRED IN FACT AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE - 2 , AHMEDABAD ('THE AO'), IN HOLDING THAT THE ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT BY THE APPE LLANT ARE NOT IN THE NATURE OF 'CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES' AND THEREBY DISALLOWING EXEMP TION U/S. 11 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ('THE ACT'). 2.THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN FACT AND IN LAW IN CO NFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO, IN CONSIDERING THE ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT BY THE APPEL LANT ARE IN NATURE OF TRADE, COMMERCE AND BUSINESS AND THEREFORE COVERED BY THE PROVISO TO SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT. 3.THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN FACT AND IN LAW IN CO NFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO IN APPLYING THE PROVISO TO SECTION 2(15) R.W.S. 13(8) OF THE ACT AND THEREBY TAXING THE ENTIRE INCOME OF THE APPELLANT. 4.WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN FACT AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO IN TAXING THE INCOM E OF THE APPELLANT DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE RECEIPTS ON ACCOUNT OF SALE OF TICKET S, SPONSORSHIP INCOME DID NOT EXCEED THE STATUTORY LIMIT OF RS. 25,00,0007- AS SP ECIFIED IN THE SECOND PROVISO TO SECTION 2(15). 5.THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN FACT AND IN LAW IN CO NFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO IN HOLDING THE ACTIVITIES OF PROMOTING THE GAME OF CRI CKET AS BUSINESS INCOME U/S. 28 WITHOUT ESTABLISHING THAT THE SAID ACTIVITIES ARE I N NATURE OF BUSINESS, TRADE OR COMMERCE. 6. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN FACT AND IN L AW IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO IN TAXING THE NET SURPLUS OF RS. 20,62,53,049 AS PER INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT. 7. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN FACT AND IN L AW IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO IN NOT ALLOWING THE BENEFIT OF SECTION LL(L)(A) OF THE ACT AND TREATING THE AMOUNT OF RS.5,14,46,438/- AS INCOME OF THE APPELLA NT. 8. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN FACT AND IN L AW IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO IN DISALLOWING BENEFIT OF SECTION 11(2) AND THER EBY TREATING THE AMOUNT OF RS. 15,48,06,61 II-AS INCOME OF THE APPELLANT. 9. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN FACT AND IN L AW IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO IN TAXING THE SUBSIDY OF RS.22,95,90,081 DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE AMOUNTS RECEIVED AS SUBSIDY ARE NOT TAXABLE FOR THE CURRENT ASSESSMENT YEAR AS PER SECTION 2(24)(XVIII) OF THE ACT. 10. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN FACT AND IN LA W IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO IN CHARGING INTEREST U/S 234B OF THE ACT. ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 3 11. THE LEARNED C1T(A) ERRED IN FACT AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO IN INITIATING PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(L)(C). 2. FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS EMANATES FROM THE ASSESSME NT ORDER: 3. THE BARODA CRICKET ASSOCIATION IS REGISTERED TRU ST VIDE REGISTRATION NO. F/881/BARODA DATED 04.11,1996 WITH ASSTT. CHARITY C OMMISSIONER, BARODA. THE ASSESSEE TRUST IS REGISTERED U/S.!2AA OF THE I. T. ACT VIDE ORDER EXEMPTION/I 10-23-13/2000-01 DATED 25-06-2001. 4.. THE BARODA CRICKET ASSOCIATION (BCA) IS ENGAGED IN PROMOTING, DEVELOPING AND ENCOURAGING THE GAME OF CRICKET WITHIN ITS REGI ON AND DO ALL OTHER INCIDENTAL OBJECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE MAIN OBJECTS OF THE ASSOCIATIONS THROUGH POWER VESTED TO THE MANAGING COMMITTEE DULY ELECTED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE ASSOCIATION. IT WAS SEEN THAT BCA EARNS INCOME OUT OF SALE OF TICKETS, SALE OF SPACE, RENT OF GROUND ETC. OUT OF THE CRICKET MATCH ES CONDUCTED AT THE GROUNDS OF BCA AT BARODA. THUS, IT WAS EVIDENT THAT BCA IS INVOLVED IN CARRYING ON THE ACTIVITY OF 'ADVANCEMENT OF OTHERS OBJECTS OF 'GENE RAL PUBLIC UTILITY' AND SUCH ACTIVITY IS IN THE NATURE OF TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUS INESS. FURTHER, AS PER CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 395 DATED 24/09/1984, IT WAS HELD THAT PROMOTION SPORTS AND GAMES IS 'ADVANCEMENT OF OBJECTS OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY'. 4.1 IN THIS REGARD, VIDE OFFICE LETTER DATED 26/11/ 2015 & 07.03.2016, THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUESTED TO SHOW-CAUSE WHY ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT COVERED BY THE PROVISIONS OF PROVISO 1 & 2 OF SECTI ON 2(15) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. AND WHY THE EXEMPTION CLAIMED U/S . 11 & 12 SHOULD NOT BE DISALLOWED AND ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 4.2 IN RESPONSE TO THE ABOVE LETTER DTD 26.1 1.2015 & 07.03.2016, A REPLY VIDE LETTER DTD. 06.02.2016 AND 08.03,2016 RECEIVED FROM THE ASSESSEE. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE ABOVE LETTER IS AS UNDER: 'VIDE POINT NO. (5) OF YOUR NOTICE DATED 26. ] 1. 2 015. YOUR KIND OFFICE HAS ASKED TO SHOW CAUSE AS TO WHY THE EARNED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE IN NATURE OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY ARE NOT COVERED UNDER THE PR OVISO OF SECTION 2(15) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. HI THIS REGARD WE WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT AS UNDER: ABOUT BCA AND ITS OBJECTS: (I) THE BCA WAS ESTABLISHED IN. 1937 AND REG ISTERED, AT PUBLIC TRUST REGISTRATION OFFICE OF BARODA REGION, BARODA VIDE P UBLIC TRUST REGISTER NO. F/ 88 1/ BARODA AS EVIDENT FROM COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF RE GISTRATION NO. 7894 ISSUED ON 04.1 1.1 996. THE OBJECTS OF THE BCA SET OUT AS PER ITS MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION ARE AS UNDER: ; (A) TO PROMOTE DEVELOP AND. ENCOURAGE CRICKET WITHIN ITS JURISDICTION. ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 4 (B) TO ARRANGE AND PROMOTE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CRI CKET CLUBS WITHIN ITS JURISDICTION. (C) TO DIRECTLY CONTROL AND MANAGE ALL CRICKET ACTIVITIES WITHIN ITS JURISDICTION. (D) TO PAY SPECIAL ATTENTION AND CARE TO THE DEVELO PMENT OF CRICKET AT ALL LEVELS WITHIN ITS JURISDICTION.. (E) TO ARRANGE FOR GOOD CRICKET GROUND AND MA INTAIN THE PITCH FOR PRACTICE AND MATCHES ARRANGED BY THE ASSOCIATION. (F) TO POPULARIZE THE GAME OF CRICKET WITHIN ITS JURISDICTION/BY ORGANIZING AND FOR CONDUCTING AND OR CONTROLLING TOURNAMENTS AND M ATCHES. (G) TO SELECT TEAMS TO REPRESENT THE ASSOCIATION IN ANY TOURNAMENT CHAMPIONSHIP OR FIXTURE LOCAL OR OTHERWISE. (H) TO START OR SPONSOR AND/OR TO SUBSCRIBE TO FUND S OR TO STAGE A MATCH FOR THE BENEFIT OF CRICKETERS OR PERSONS WHO HAVE RENDERED SERVICES TO THE GAME OF CRICKET OR FOR THEIR FAMILIES OR TO A SPORTING CAUS E OR INSTITUTION. (I) TO BORROW OR RAISE MONEY WHICH MAY BE REQUIRED FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE ASSOCIATION. (J) TO COLLECT FUNDS AND TO UTILIZE THE SAME IN SUC H MANNER AS MAY BE CONSIDERED FIT FOR THE FULFILLMENT OF THE OBJECTS O F THE ASSOCIATION. (K) TO INVEST MONEYS AND FUNDS OF THE ASSOCIATION I N SUCH MANNER AS MAY BE DECIDED UPON FROM TIME TO TIME. (L) TO TRAM UMPIRE AND TO FORM A PANEL OF UMPIRES. (M) TO COLLECT ALL THE CRICKET STATISTICS OF DIFFER ENT PLAYERS AND, CLUBS SO AS TO GIVE GUIDANCE IN THE SELECTION OF PLAYERS FOR IMPOR TANT MATCHES. (N)TO DO ANY OTHER ACTS IN FURTHERANCE OF THE ABOVE OBJECTS NOT INCONSISTENT THERE WITH. (II) FROM THE ABOVE, YOUR KIND OFFICE WILL AP PRECIATE THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN FOCUSING ON DEVELOPMENT AND PROMOTION OF CRICKET AN D IDENTIFYING NEW TALENTS WHO CAN REPRESENT CRICKET AT THE NATIONAL AND INTER NATIONAL LEVELS. THERE HAS BEEN A CONSTANT ENDEAVOR TO ENCOURAGE THE UPCOMING AND BUDDING CRICKETERS AND PROVIDE THEM OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN COMP ETITIVE FORM OF CRICKET BY ADDING THE NEW TOURNAMENTS. WITH A VIEW TO SHARPEN THE SKILLS OF PLAYERS SPECIALIZED COACHES ARE INVITED TO IMPART TRAINING ACROSS ALL AGE GROUPS. IN ORDER TO ENSURE THE FITNESS AND. SKILLS OF THE PLAYERS, T EAMS OF JUNIORS AND SENIORS ARE SENT TO OUTSTATION ' TOURNAMENTS. WE HAVE WITNESSED MANY PLAYERS IN PAST WHO ARE FROM VADODARA AND HAVE REPRESENTED CRICKET AT I NTERNATIONAL LEVEL, THIS HAS HAPPENED ONLY DUE TO THE CONTRIBUTION OF BCA. T HE BCA ALSO FACILITATES THE PRESENT AND PAST CRICKETERS WHO REPRESENT BAROD A IN RANJI TROPHY GIVING THEM THE CASH REWARDS FOR THEIR ACHIEVEMENT. IT IS ALSO NOT OUT OF PLACE TO MENTION THAT MANY PLAYERS HAVE BEEN, ENGAGED BUT TH E BCA AND GIVEN EMPLOYMENT BY BCA. THESE PLAYERS PROVIDE TRAINING A ND FACILITATE OTHER ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 5 ACTIVITIES OF BCA. IT HAS STARTED WITH MANY INITIAT IVES TO SPREAD THE GAME TO THE GRASS ROOT LEVEL BY INTRODUCING THE GAME TO THE REM OTEST AREAS OF THE STATE SUCH AS NAVSARI, BILIMORA AND. MEHSANA. IT MAY ALSO BE N OTED THAT BCA NOT ONLY PROMOTES THE GAME OF CRICKET BUT ALSO SPREADS IT AW ARENESS IN THE SCHOOLS AND ENCOURAGES CHILDREN TO TAKE UP THE GAME. BCA ORGANI ZES SCHOOL TOURNAMENTS WHICH INCULCATES A SPORTSMAN SPIRIT IN A CHILD AND. AT THE SAME TUNE PROMOTES THE GAME OF CRICKET. ACTIVITIES DURING THE YEAR: III.) DURING THE YEAR IN QUESTION, IT IS SUBMI TTED THAT BCA HAS UNDERTAKEN VARIOUS ACTIVITIES STARTING FROM IDENTIFYING THE NE W TALENT FROM THE REMOTE VILLAGES OF VADODARA VIS A VIS FOCUSED ON PROVIDING SPECIALIZED, TRAINING, THROUGH MODEM, EQUIPMENTS AND. COACHES. BCA ALSO OR GANIZED VARIOUS MATCHES INCLUDING RANJI MATCHES AND TRAINING SESSIO NS FOR ALL THESE PLAYERS. ALSO TO IMPROVE THE SKILL OF UMPIRE AND TO MEET THE SHORTAGE OF PROFESSIONAL AND SKILLED UMPIRE IN INDIA, VARIOUS SESSIONS AND T RAINING PROGRAMS HAVE BEEN UNDERTAKEN BY BCA. IN ORDER TO ENCOURAGE ALL THE PL AYERS AND IN ORDER TO ENSURE FITNESS AND SKILL OF PLAYERS AT OPTIMUM, LEV EL, TEAMS OF SENIORS AND JUNIORS HAVE BEEN SENT TO OUTSTATIONS FOR PARTICIPA TION IN TOURNAMENTS. THIS IS TO ENSURE THAT, THE PLAYERS CAN PERFORM IN ALL SITU ATION AND ALL CONDITIONS. IV.) DURING THE YEAR. BCA HAS ORGANIZE D VARIOUS PROGRAMS WHICH ARE SUMMARIZED AS UNDER; A.) VARIOUS INITIATIVES TO SPREAD CRI CKET TO GRASS ROOT LEVEL HAS BEEN ACHIEVED WITH, THE GAMES BEING TAKEN TO THE REMOTEST COMERS OF THE STATE, I.E. NAV-SARI, BILLIMORA. MEHSANA ETC. BCA E NSURED THAT BOYS/GIRLS FROM THESE PANS OF THE STATE ARE ATTENDING THE REGULAR N ETS AT DISTRICT CENTERS. CONSCIOUS EFFORTS HAVE BEEN MADE BY BCA TO DEVELOP INFRASTRUCTURE IN THESE PAN OF THE STATE. AS A RESULT OF THE ABOVE, DURING THE YEAR 12 PLAYERS HAVE REPRESENTED THE BCA IN BCCI VARIOUS AGE GROUP TOURN AMENTS DURING THE SEASONS. B.) DURING THE YEAR, BCA INTRODUCED FOR THE F IRST TIME U-12 (UNDER 12) INTER SCHOOL KNOCK OUT INVITATION TOURNAMENTS. TOTA L 18 SCHOOLS PARTICIPATED IN THESE TOURNAMENTS. C.) WITH A VIEW TO SHARPEN THE SKILL OF PLAY ERS, THE SPECIALIZED COACHES, MR. T A SHE/CAR (FAST BOWLER COACH) AND MR. R. SHRIDHAR (FIELDING COACH), WERE INVITED TO IMPART TRAINING ACROSS ALL THE AGE GROUP . D.) DURING THE YEAR, THE SENIOR TEAM PARTICIPA TED IN. SHAFT DARASHAH (KSCA) TOURNAMENT AND BUCHI BABU TOURNAMENTS. L/-25 PARTIC IPATED IN. J.P.AARAY MEMORIAL CRICKET TOURNAMENT AT CHANDIGARH. TOUR OF LI-19 TEAM WAS ORGANIZED FOR PLAYING PRACTICE MATCHES AT HYDERABAD AND BANGALORE. U-16 THREE DAY INVITATION TOURNAMENT WAS ALSO ORGANIZED, WHERE FOUR STATES TEAMS ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 6 I.E. HA.MA.CHAL PRADESH, GUJARAT, MADHYA PRADESH AN D MAHARASHTRA PARTICIPATED ALONG WITH 2 BCA TEAMS'. E.) IN ORDER TO ENCOURAGE THE UPCOMING LOCAL AND DISTINCT CRICKETERS AND TO PROVIDE THEM WITH OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN COM PETITIVE FORM OJ CRICKET, ENHANCED NUMBER OF MATCHES MERE ORGANIZED, TO PROVI DE GOOD, PLATFORM. ONE OF SUCH INITIATIVE BEING THAT DURING THE YEAR BCA H AS ADDED NEW TOURNAMENT IN THE FORM OF CHALLENGER TROPHY FOR SESSIONS AND U-19 AGE GROUP. THIS HAS TREMENDOUSLY IMPROVED THE CONFIDENCE LEVELS OF ALL THE PLAYERS. F). VARIOUS INITIATIVE AND ORIENTATION PROGRAMS WER E UNDERTAKEN BY HEAD COACH, SENIORS FROM BCC1 AND OTHER PROFESSIONS FROM THIS FIELD TO EDUCATE THE PLAYERS, SUPPORT STAFF WERE UNDERTAKEN TO PROVIDE K NOWLEDGE AND BRIEFED ABOUT THE ARID-DOPING AND ANTI-CORRUPTION CODE OF BCCL WH ICH ELABORATES DOS AND DONTS. THE POCKET GUIDE WAS CIRCULATED TO ALL THE P LAYERS, SUPPORT STAFF, PHYSIOS. G.) DURING THE YEAR, BCA TEAM REPRESENTED VAD ODARA AT VARIOUS TOURNAMENTS WHEREBY VARIOUS TALENTS HAVE BEEN IDENT IFIED. MANY PLAYERS PERFORMED EXCEPTIONALLY WELL SCORED CENTURY AND MAN Y TOOK WICKETS. THESE ARE FUTURE STARS WHICH WILL BE CONTRIBUTED BY BCA. THE FOLLOWING BCCI MATCHES HAVE BEEN UNDERTAKEN AND PLAYED BY BCA TEAM: 1. RANJI TROPHY INTER STATE TOURNAMENT (VIJA Y HAZARE TROPHY) 2. SUED MUSTAQ AH TROPHY (T 20 MATCHES) 3. U-25 COL. C.K. NAYUDU TROPHY 4. LI-1 9 COOCH BEHAR TROPHY 5. U-L 9 VINOD MANKAD TROPHY (ONE DAY MATCHE S) 6. U-16 VIJ AY MARCHANL TROPHY 7. U-L-L WEST ZONE TOURNAMENT. . 8. SENIOR WOMEN ONE DAY INTER STATE MATCHES 9. SENIOR WOMEN T 20 INTER STATE MATCHES 10. UNDER 19 WOMEN ONE DAY INTER STATE MATCHES I.) DURING THE YEAR BCA HAS PROVIDED EMPLOYMENT {PA RT TIME/FULL TIME) OR REGULAR MONETARY EMOLUMENTS TO VARIOUS EX-CRICKETS FOR VARIOUS SEGMENTS SUCH AS MANAGER CRICKET OPERATOR (MCO), COACHES, ASSISTA NT COACH FOR VARIOUS SEGMENT OF CATEGORIES OF . TEAM. TRAINERS, CHAIRMAN SELECTOR, BOWLING COACH, FIELDING COACH ETC. ....... J) DURING THE YEAR, BCA ORGANIZED FOLLOWING EDUCATI ONAL PROGRAMS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE SKILL AND AWARENESS OF THE PLAYE RS SUCH AS UMPIRE SEMINAR, SCORER SEMINAR, FAST BOWLING CAMP, FIELDING CAMP, O PEN TRIAL FOR BOWLER- THIRD LEG, LEVEL 'B' FOR COACHES, LEVEL 'O' FOR TRA INERS AND LEVEL-1 TRAINERS' COURSE, LEVEL-1 CRICKET SPECIFIC COURSE, LEVEL B RE FRESHER COURSE FOR COACHES, LEVEL C REFRESHER COURSE FOR COACHES, CURATOR CERTI FICATION CURSE AND VIDEO ANALYST SEMINAR IVHICH WERE GUIDED BY VARIOUS SENIO RS AND PROFESSIONAL PLAYERS. ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 7 V.) FROM THE ABOVE, IT MAY BE NOTED THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF BCA FOCUSES ON ACHIEVING HIGH STANDARDS OF CRICKET AND AT THE SAME TIME DEVELOPING AND. PROMOTING THE SPORTS IN EVERY COMER OF THE STATE. B CA IS INVOLVED IN PROVIDING A PLATFORM TO THE YOUTH FOR DEVELOPING THEIR SKILLS RELATED TO THE SPORT OF CRICKET AND BENEFITS PUBLIC AT LARGE. THUS THE ASSESSEE IS A. CHARITABLE INSTITUTION, S SECTION 2(15): VI) YOUR KIND OFFICE IN THE NOTICE HAS MENTION ED THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE SHOULD NOT BE COVERED BY THE FIRST AND SEC OND PROVISO TO SECTION 2(15). WITHOUT ADMITTING WE SUBMIT THAT NO MATERIAL IS BROUGHT ON RECORD, BY YOUR KIND OFFICE TO STATE THAT THE ACTIVITIES CARRI ED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE ARE IN THE NATURE OF BUSINESS ACTIVITIES. IN VIEW OF THE SAME WE SUBMIT THAT NO ADVERSE VIEW MAY PLEASE HE TAKEN. HOWEVER, WE SUBMIT THAT T HE PROVISO IS NOT APPLICABLE AND AS OF NOW ON THIS ISSUE DIRECT, DECI SIONS ARE AVAILABLE. WE RELY ON: A. IN THE CASE OF DELHI & DISTRICT CRICKET A SSOCIATION V. DIT (E) IT A NO. 3095/DEL/201J2 DECISION DATED 13-1-2015 THE REGISTR ATION U/S. 12A WAS CANCELLED ON THE GROUND THAT THE INCOME OF THE TRUS T INCLUDED. INCOME FROM GROUND BOOKING CHARGES, HEALTH CLUB CHARGES, INCOME FROM CORPORATE BOXES, LAWN BOOKING INCOME, LEAGUE ENTRY FEES, PLAYING CAR D, RECEIPTS, SPONSORSHIP MONEY, SALE OF TICKETS, ADVERTISEMENT, SOUVENIRS, I PL MATCHES ETC. IT WAS HELD THAT THE CORE ACTIVITY OF THE. ASSESSEE WAS UNDISPU TEDLY CHARITABLE IN NATURE. HENCE IT. IS NOT THE CASE OF REVENUE THAT THE ASSES SEE WAS CARRYING ON 'TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS''' UNDER THE GARB OF THE ACTIV ITY BEING 'GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY''. AS REGARD THE NATURE OF VARIOUS RECEIPTS IT WAS HELD THAT IT DO N OT RESULT IN THE ASSESSEE BEING HELD AS UNDERTAKING ACTIVITIES IN THE NATURE OF 'TR ADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS'', 'HIE RECEIPTS WERE INTRINSICALLY RELATED, INTERCONN ECTED AND. INTERWOVEN WITH THE CHARITABLE ACTIVITY AND CANNOT HE VIEWED SEPARATELY . THE ACTIVITIES RESULTING IN THE SAID RECEIPTS ARE ALSO CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES AN D NOT ''TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS' ACTIVITIES. DIT (EXEMPTION) V. TAMILNADU CRICKET ASSOCIATION (2013) 40 TAXMANN.COM 250 (MADRAS) 'SECTION 12AA, READ WITH SECTIONS 2(15), 11.12,12A AND 13, OF THE INCOME- TAX ACT, 1961 - CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS TRUST -REGISTRATION PROCEDURE /CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION) - ASSESSEE, A CRIC KET ASSOCIATION, APPLIED FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA - COMMISSIONER AFTER SATISFYING! HIMSELF ABOUT GENUINENESS OF OBJECTS OF ASSESSEE GR ANTED REGISTRATION TO IT UNDER SECTION 12AA ON 28-3-2003 LATER ON 19-7-2011 COMMISSIONER EXAMINED INCOME AND EXPENDITURE STATEMENT OF ASSESS EE AND HELD THAT ASSESSEE WAS RECEIVING INCOME FROM HOLDING OF MATCHES, WHICH IVAS IN NATURE OF TRADE OR COMMERCE OR BUSINESS AND HIT BY PROVISO TO SECTION 2(15) - HE FURTHER HELD THAT ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 8 ACTIVITIES OF ASSESSEE NOT BEING CHARITABLE AS PER SECTION 2(15), SAME COULD NOT BE HELD TO BE GENUINE AND ASSESSEE WAS NOT A CHCMIA HLE INSTITUTION - HE, THEREFORE, CANCELLED REGISTRATION GRANTED TO ASSESS EE - WHETHER SINCE OBJECTS REMAINED AS THEY WERE IN YEAR 2003, COMMISSIONER HA D ERRED IN CANCELLING REGISTRATION OF ASSESSEE-ASSOCIATION - HELD, YES. . .. C.)ALSO SEE RECENT DECISION OF 1TAT. CHENNAI IN TA MILNADU CRICKET ASSOCIATION V. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMP TIONS) DATED 14-8- 2016. COPY ATTACHED AS ANNEXURE 6. 4.3 THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE IS CAREFULLY CONSIDERED BUT NOT ACCEPTABLE FOR FOLLOWING REASONS. 4.3.1 THE ASSESSEE IS ADMITTEDLY INVOLVED IN PROMOT ION OF CRICKET AS GAME. ON PERUSAL OF THE INCOME AND EXPENDITURE STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS A TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 34,02,6 6,305/- WHICH INCLUDES TOURNAMENT AND OTHER RECEIPT, OF RS. 23,05,52,093/- AND OTHER-INCOME OF RS. 10,97,14,212/-. IT IS NOTICED THAT, ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED TV SUBSID Y OF RS. 10,08,90,881 AND I PL SUBSIDY AT RS 12,86,99,200/- TOTALING TO R S. 22,95,90,081/-, APART FROM THIS ASSESSEE HAS ALSO RECEIVED AN AMOUNT OF R S.7.10,000/- AS SALE OF TICKET FROM ODI MATCHES. IT IS STATED BY THE ASSESSEE,S RE PRESENTATIVE THAT I PL SUBSIDY HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THEM FROM BCCI. 4.3.2 WHENEVER A FOREIGN TEAM VISITS INDIA, THE INT ERNATIONAL MATCHES SUCH AS TEST ARID ODI ARE ALLOTTED BY BCCI TO THE STATE CRI CKET ASSOCIATIONS BY A ROTATION POLICY. THE MATCHES ARE CONDUCTED AND MANA GED BY THE RESPECTIVE STATE ASSOCIATIONS. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR BCCI TO CONDUCT ALL THESE MATCHES WITH ITS OWN LIMITED PERSONNEL. IT IS DEPENDENT ON THE S TATE ASSOCIATIONS, THEIR OFFICE- BEARERS, THEIR EMPLOYEES AND THEIR NETWORK AND RESO URCES AT THE LOCAL CENTER TO CONDUCT THE MATCHES. THE ASSOCIATION MANAGES THE EN TIRE MATCH RIGHT FROM PROVISION OF SECURITY TO PLAYERS, SPECTATORS IN CO- ORDINATION \VITH RESPECTIVE STATE POLICE PERSONNEL TAKING OTHER SECURITY MEASUR ES LIKE FIRE PREVENTION ETC. THE ASSOCIATION INCURS A GOOD CHUNK OF EXPENDITURE IN CONDUCTING AN INTERNATIONAL TEST/ODI/T20/IPL/CL T20 MATCHES. IN O RDCR IO HAVE FAIR AND EQUITABLE SHARING OF THE REVENUES, ARRANGEMENTS HAV E EVOLVED OVER TIME, ABOUT THE RESPECTIVE RESPONSIBILITIES, RIGHTS, SHARE OF R EVENUE ETC. OF BCCI AND THE STATE ASSOCIATIONS. THE STATE ASSOCIATION IS ENTITL ED TO THE TICKET REVENUE AND GROUND SPONSORSHIP REVENUES. EXPENSES ON ACCOUNT OF SECURITY FOR PLAYERS AND SPECTATORS, TEMPORARY STANDS, OPERATION OF FLOODLIG HTS, SCORE BOARDS, MANAGEMENT OF CROWD, INSURANCE FOR THE MATCH, ELECT RICITY CHARGES, CATERING ETC. ARE MET BY THE STATE ASSOCIATIONS. ON THE OTHE R HAND EXPENDITURE ON TRANSPORTATION OF PLAYERS AND THE MATCH OFFICIALS, BOARDING AND LODGING, EXPENSES ON FOOD FOR PLAYERS AND OFFICIALS, TOUR FE E, MATCH FEE, ETC. ARE MET BY BCCI AND REVENUES FROM SPONSORSHIP BELONG TO BCCI. IN RESPECT OF REVENUES ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 9 'FROM SALE OF MEDIA RIGHTS, AN ARRANGEMENT HAS EVOL VED OVER TIME. UNTIL 1991- 92, THE-INCOME FROM MEDIA RIGHTS WAS MEAGER. WITH T HE' GROWTH IN INCOME FROM MEDIA RIGHTS, IT BECAME NECESSARY TO OPTIMIZE THE ARRANGEMENT FOR SALE OF MEDIA RIGHTS. FOR A TEST SERIES OR ODI SERIES CONDU CTED IN MULTIPLE CENTERS AND ORGANIZED BY BCCI AND MULTIPLE STATE ASSOCIATIONS, IT WAS FOUND THAT IF EACH STARE ASSOCIATION WERE TO NEGOTIATE THE SALE OF RIG HTS TO EVENTS IN ITS CENTER, IT NEGOTIATING STRENGTH WOULD BE LOW. IT WAS, THEREFOR E, AGREED THAT BCCI WOULD NEGOTIATE THE SALE OF MEDIA RIGHTS FOR THE ENTIRE C OUNTRY TO OPTIMIZE THE INCOME UNDER THIS HEAD. IT WAS FURTHER DECIDED THAT OUT. O F THE RECEIPT FROM THE SALE OF MEDIA RIGHTS 70% OF THE GROSS REVENUE L ESS PRODUCTION COST WOULD BELONG TO THE STATE ASSOCIATION. EVERY YEAR, BCCI H AS PAID OUT. EXACTLY 70% OF ITS RECEIPTS FROM MEDIA RIGHTS(LESS PRODUCTION COST ) TO THE STATE ASSOCIATIONS. THIS AMOUNT HAS BEEN UTILIZED BY THE RESPECTIVE ASS OCIATION TO BUILD INFRASTRUCTURE AND PROMOTE CRICKET, MAKING THE GAME MORE POPULAR, NURTURING AND ENCOURAGING CRICKET TALENT, AND LEADING TO HIGH ER REVENUES FROM MEDIA RIGHT. 4.4 THE ASSESSEE IS THUS, ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS O F ENTERTAINMENT OF PUBLIC AT LARGE BY ARRANGING/POSTING NATIONAL AND INTERNATION AL CRICKET TOURNAMENTS FOR A FEE/CESS, THE NATURE OF RECEIPTS AS MENTIONED IN TH E ABOVE TABLE AMPLY EXPLAINS THE NATURE OF ACTIVITY CARRIED ON BY THE A.SSESSEE. THE ABOVE TABLE DEMONSTRATES THAT THE ASSESSEE IS INVOLVED IN PROFIT GENERATING ACTIVITY. THE ASSESSEE CARRIES OUT THE ACTIVITY OF HOSTING MATCHES AT NATIONAL/INT ERNATIONAL AT REGULAR INTERVALS WHICH IS CLEAR FROM ITS INCOME & EXPENDITURE STATEM ENT OF THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION AND OF THE EARLIER YEARS. THEREFORE, THE SUBMISSION OI THE ASSESSEE THAT IT IS NOT CARRYING ON ANY BUSINESS ACTIVITY IS NOT; ACCEPTABLE. THE ASSESSEE HAS RELIED ON VARIOUS DECISIONS TO EXPLAIN ITS STAN D THAT, THE SAID ACTIVITY OF CONDUCTING CRICKET MATCHES IS NOT A BUSINESS ACTIVI TY. THE SAME HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED AND THE FACTS OF THE INSTANT CASE ARE QU ITE DIFFERENT FROM THE DECISIONS CITED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ARE HENCE DISTI NGUISHABLE. 4.5 IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE ISSUE ON HAND IS TO D ECIDE WHETHER THE ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE ARE CHARITABLE IN NATUR E. HENCE, IT IS PERTINENT TO EXAMINE THE ISSUE IN THE LIGHT OF THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.2 (15) R.W. PROVISO (1) & (2) OF THE L.T ACT. CHARITABLE OBJECTS DEFINED IN T HE SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT. 4,6.1 SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT DEFINES 'CHARITABLE PURPOSES'. FIRST PROVISO, THERETO WITH EFFECT FROM ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 LA ID DOWN THAT, IF ANY TRUST ETC. (A) IS ENGAGED IN PURSUING OBJECTS OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY FOR OTHER OBJECTS') AND (B) CARRIES ON ANY ACTIVITY IN THE NATURE OF TR ADE, BUSINESS OR COMMERCE OR PROVIDES ANY SERVICES IN RELATION TO THE TRADE, COM MERCE SERVICES OR BUSINESS AND (C) AGGREGATE RECEIPTS THERE FROM EXCEED RS. 25 LACS, IT SHALL BE CONSIDERED THAT ADVANCEMENT OF OTHER OBJECTS IS NOT A CHARITAB LE PURPOSE. IF SO, SUCH A ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 10 TRUST IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR THE EXEMPTION INASMUCH AS THE PRIMARY CONDITION OF BEING EXISTING FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSE-IS NOT SATISF IED. 4.6.2 DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDIN GS FOR THE A.Y 2009-10 TO 2012-13. THE ASSESSEE'S CLAIM OF EXEMPTION U/S 1 1 WAS NOT ALLOWED AS THE ASSESSEE WAS HELD TO BE CARRYING ON THE ACTIVITY OF 'ADVANCEMENT OF OTHER OBJECTS OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY' AS PER THE DEFIN ITION OF SEC 2(15) OF THE ACT. DURING THE COURSE OF SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT OF A.Y 200 9-10, A.Y.2010-11, 2011- 12 AND A.Y. 2012-13, IT WAS ESTABLISHED THAT THE AS SESSEE WAS NOT DOING ANY 'CHARITABLE /EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITY' BUT IT' WAS IN T HE BUSINESS OI ENTERTAINMENT OF PEOPLE AT LARGE BY ARRANGING/HOSTING NATIONAL AND I NTERNATIONAL LEVELS CRICKET TOURNAMENTS FOR A FEE/CESS. SINCE THE PROVISIONS OF SEE 2(15) READ WITH THE PROVISO 1 & 2 ARE SQUARELY APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE EASE, THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT WAS DISALLOWED BY THE A O FOR A.Y 2009-10 AND A.Y. 2010-11. THE C1T (A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR A.Y 2009-10, 2O1O-11 & 2011-12 AND AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A), THE ASSESSEE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL IN HON'BLE 1TAT FOR A .Y. 2012-13 IS PENDING WITH FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. 4.7 IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT AS PER THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 395 DATED 24/09/1984, IT WAS HELD THAT PROMOTION OF SPORTS AN D GAMES IS 'ADVANCEMENT OF OBJECTS OF GENERA! PUBLIC UTILITY'. THUS, IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE ASSESSEE IS CLEARLY ENGAGED IN AN ACTIVITY THAT IS TO BE TREATE D AS 'ADVANCEMENT OF OBJECTS OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY'. SINCE THE ASSESSEE IS COVE RED BY THE LAST, LIMB OF THE DEFINITION OF SEC.2 (15), NOW IT IS TO BE SEEN WHET HER THE CONDITIONS IN THE PROVISO 1 OF THE SEC.2 (15) ARE APPLICABLE TO THE F ACTS OF THE CASE. IT IS VERY CLEAR FROM THE AUDITED ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE- THAT THE BCA EARNS INCOME OUT OF SALE OF TICKETS, SALE OF SPACE, A/C CABIN TICKET SA LE ETC. OXIT OF THE CRICKET MATCHES CONDUCTED AT THE GROUNDS OF BCA AT BARODA W HICH IS NOTHING BUT A BUSINESS ACTIVITY CARRIED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE. THE SAME HAS BEEN CLEARLY DISCUSSED IN PARA-4 ABOVE. THUS, IT IS CLEARLY EVID ENT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN BUSINESS ACTIVITY, THEREBY SATISFYING THE CONDIT IONS PRESCRIBED IN THE PROVISO 1 TO SEC.2 (15) OF THE I.T ACT. SINCE THE GROSS REC EIPTS OF THE ASSESSEE EXCEEDS RS. 25 LAKHS, DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE PROVISIONS OF THE SECOND PROVISO TO SEC.2 (15) OF THE I.T ACT ARC ALSO SATIS FIED. THUS, THE ASSESSEE IS CLEARLY COVERED BY THE PROVISIONS OF SEC 2(15) READ WITH THE PROVISO 1 & 2 TO THE SAID SECTION. 4.7.1 IN THIS REGARD RELIANCE IS PLACED ON THE DECI SION OF THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA IN THE CASE OF CRICKET ASSOCIATION OF BENG AL V/S CIT(37 1TR 277) WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT A CLUB FORMED FOR THE DEVE LOPMENT OF PROMOTION OF SPORTS OR GAMES OR ENTERTAINMENT IS NOT A CHARITABL E INSTITUTION. THE HEAD NOTE OF THE DECISION IS AS UNDER:- ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 11 'SECTION 1 I OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (CORRESPON DING TO SECTION 4(3)(I) OF THE INDIAN INCOME-TAX ACT, 1922) - CHARITABLE OR RE LIGIOUS TRUST - EXEMPTION OF INCOME FROM PROPERTY HELD UNDER - ASSESSMENT YEARS 1950-51 TO 1952-53 - WHETHER WHILE PROMOTION OF GAMES AS A PART OF EDUCA TION OF THOSE WHO PARTICIPATE IN THEM MAY BE A CHARITABLE PURPOSE, PR OMOTION OF PRACTICE OF GAME IN GENERAL EITHER FOR ENTERTAINMENT OF PUBLIC OR FO R ADVANCEMENT OF GAME ITSELF COULD NOT BE HELD TO BE CHARITABLE - HELD, YES - AS SESSEE WAS AN ASSOCIATION WHOSE MAM OBJECT, WAS TO PROMOTE GAME OF CRICKET - ANOTHER OBJECT: AUTHORIZED ASSESSEE TO CANY OUT ANY OTHER BUSINESS OR ACTIVITY WHICH MIGHT SEEM TO ASSESSEE CAPABLE OF BEING CARRIED ON IN CON NECTION WITH ABOVE - ASSESSEE RNERERY HELD SOME DEMONSTRATION OR EXHIBIT ION MATCHES AND DID NOT PROVIDE ANY TRAINING IN GAME OF CRICKET TO NOVICES OR ANY ADVANCED TRAINING FOR PERSONS WHO WERE ALREADY PRACTICED PLAYERS ITS ACTI VITIES OUTSIDE HOLDING MATCHES WAS LIMITED ENTIRELY TO ITS OWN MEMBERS AND ONLY CONTACT IT HAD WITH_ PUBLIC WAS BY WAY OF HAVING THEM AS SPECTATORS, ON PAYMENT OF FEE, OF MATCHES ARRANGED BY IT - WHETHER INCOME THAT WAS DERIVED FR OM FEES CHARGED FOR ADMISSION TO GAMES HELD UNDER AUSPICES OF ASSOCIATI ON COULD NOT BE SAID TO BE INCOME DERIVED FROM ANY PROPERTY - HELD, YES - WHET HER FURTHER, THERE WAS NO GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY, SO AS TO AMOUNT TO CHARITY, IN ARRANGING CRICKET MATCHES WHICH PUBLIC COULD SEE ON PAYMENT ARID HENCE, ASSES SEE WAS NOT ENTITLED TO EXEMPTION CONFERRED BY SECTIONS 4(3)(I) AND 4(3)(IA ) OF 1922 ACT - HELD, YES' 4.7.2 IN THIS REGARD RELIANCE IS PLACED ON THE DECI SION OF THE ITAT CHENNAI BENCH 'B' IN THE CASE OF TAMIL NADU CRICKET ASSOCIA TION [32 TAXMANN.COM 5O] 'THE QUESTION IS WHETHER ASSESSEE IS PROMOTING AND DEVELOPING THE CRICKET GAME AS AN ACTIVITY OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY. THIS IS THE CRUCIAL QUESTION TO BE ASKED. 'DIE PHYSICAL PLAY OF CRICKET GAME IS NOT TH E SOLE POINT WHICH WILL DECIDE AS TO WHETHER THE ASSESSEE IS CARRYING ON ITS ACTIV ITIES AS STATED IN ITS MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION OR THE ASSESSEE'S ACTIVIT IES ARE GENUINE OR NOT. IT: IS ALSO NECESSARY TO EXAMINE WHETHER THE ASSESSEE H AS SATISFIED THE CONCEPTUAL REQUIREMENTS OF ITS OBJECTIVES. (PARA 52] REGARDING THE PHYSICAL ASPECT OF THE GAME, THE ASSE SSEE IS CARRYING ON WHAT IS STATED IN THE OBJECTS. THESE ACTIVITIES ARE GENUINE . THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES CARRIED ON BY THE ASSESSEE STOPS WITH TH E PHYSICAL ASPECTS OF THE GAME. THE MATCHES CONDUCTED BY THE ASSESSEE DO NOT GO TO THE EXTENT OF 'ADVANCEMENT OF ANY OTHER OBJECT OI' GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY1. THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE DID NOT COME \VITHIN THE CONCEPTUAL FR AMEWORK OF CHARITY VIS-A-VIS ACTIVITY OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY ENVISAGED IN SEC TION 2(15). AS ALREADY STATED, IT HAS BECOME AN INDUSTRY BY ITSELF. THE PATTERN OF TH E RECEIPTS ACCOUNTED BY THE ASSESSEE, SHOWS THAT THE REVENUE IS GENERATED IROM ADVERTISEMENT AND SPECIAL EVENTS LIKE I PL MATCH, CELEBRITY MATCHES, ETC. THE SE ARE ALL COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES. THEREFORE, IT IS CRYSTAL CLEAR THAT EVE N THOUGH CRICKET MATCHES ARE ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 12 CONDUCTED BY THE ASSESSEE, THEY ARE NOT CONDUCTED I N ACCORDANCE WITH THE OBJECTS AS STATED IN ITS MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION AND THOSE ACTIVITIES ARE NOT FOR 'ADVANCEMENT OF ANY OTHER OBJECT OF GENERAL PUB LIC UTILITY1, AS EXPLAINED IN THE PROVISO TO SECTION 2(15). [PARA 53 ' ....... -1.7.3 FURTHER RELIANCE 4.3.5 IS PLACED ON THE DECI SION OF THE HON'BLE ITAT, PANAJI BENCH, IN THE CASE OF ENTERTAINMENT SOCIETY OF GOA [34 TAXRNAN.COM 214] WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT PROVISO T O SECTION 2(15) WOULD BE ATTRACTED IF ACTIVITY CARRIED ON BY INSTITUTIONS AR E SIMILAR TO TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS; FOR THIS PURPOSE USE OR APPLICATION OR RE TENTION OF CONSIDERATION RECEIVED IS NOT RELEVANT AT ALL. 'THE PROVISO CLEARLY STATES THAT THE ADVANCEMENT OF ANY OTHER OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY SHALL NOT BE CHARITABLE PURPOSE AND SUBSEQUENT TO THAT IT GIVES CERTAIN CONDITIONS. IF THE INSTITUTION FULFILS THOS E CONDITIONS AS ARE STIPULATED IN THE PROVISO, THE INSTITUTION WILL NOT BE REGARDED T O HAVE BEEN ENGAGED FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF ANY OTHER OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC U TILITY FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 2(15) AND WILL NO LONGER REMAIN TO HAVE BEE N ENGAGED IN CHARITABLE PURPOSES. IN FACT, THIS PROVISO PUTS AN EMBARGO ON THE INSTITUTION THAT IN CASE THE INSTITUTION FALLS WITHIN THE PROVISO, IT WILL N OT HAVE BEEN ENGAGED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSE EVEN IF IT IS ENGAGED IN THE ADV ANCEMENT OF ANY OTHER OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY. THE EMBARGO STATES T HAT IF THE INSTITUTION IS ENGAGED IN CARRYING ON OF ANY ACTIVITY IN THE NATURE OF TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS OR ANY ACTIVITY OR RENDERING ANY SER VICE IN RELATION TO ANY TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS FOR CESS OR FEE OR ANY OTHER C ONSIDERATION, THE INSTITUTION SHALL NOT BE REGARDED TO HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN CARR YING ON CHARITABLE PURPOSE. THIS PROVISO IN THE LAST SENTENCE FURTHER STATES TH AT NATURE OF USE OR APPLICATION OR RETENTION OF THE INCOME BY THE INSTITUTI ON FROM SUCH ACTIVITY WILL NOT BE RELEVANT CONSIDERATION. IN VIEW OF THIS SPECIFIC PROVISION, ONE IS NOT CONCERNED TO LOOK INTO HOW AN INSTITUTION HAS USED, APPLIED OR RETAINED ITS INCOME, IF THE SAME HAS BEEN RECEIVED BY THE INS TITUTION FROM ANY ACTIVITY CARRIED OUT IN THE NATURE OF TRADE, COMMERCE OR B USINESS OR FROM ANY ACTIVITY OF RENDERING ANY SERVICE IN RELATION TO TRADE, COMM ERCE OR BUSINESS. THE WORDS USED IN THE PROVISO ARE 'CARRYING ON OF ANY ACTIVIT Y IN THE NATURE OF TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS' AND NOT THE WORDS 'CARRYIN G ON TRADE COMMERCE OR BUSINESS'. USING OF THE WORDS 'ANY ACTIVITY IN THE NATURE OF PRIOR TO 'TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS1 HAS A SPECIFIC MEANING WHILE INTERPRETING THE PROVISO. THESE WORDS CANNOT BE IGNORED. TINS MANDATES THAT T HE INSTITUTION NEED NOT ACTUALLY BE CARRYING ON TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS BUT THE ACTIVITY CARRIED ON BY IT ARE TO BE SIMILAR TO TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSIN ESS. THE PROFIT MOTIVE IS REQUIRED WHILE AN INSTITUTION IS CARRYING ON TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS. THE USE OF WORDS 'CARRYING ON ANY ACTIVITY IN THE NATURE OF TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS' WILL MEAN-THAT THERE NEED N OT BE PROFIT MOTIVE IN ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 13 CARRYING ON THE ACTIVITY BY THE INSTITUTION. THE LE GISLATURE IS FULLY AWARE OF THAT AN INSTITUTION WHICH IS INCORPORATED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSE CANNOT HAVE PROFIT MOTIVE.' 4.8 IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND LEGAL PROVISIO NS, THE ASSESSEE IS THUS HELD TO BE CARRYING ON THE ACTIVITY OF 'ADVANCEMENT OF OTHE R OBJECTS OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY' AND WHICH IS IN THE NATURE OF BUSINESS, TR ADE, COMMERCE AND NOT 'EDUCATION' AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE IS COVERED BY THE PROVISIONS OF SEC 2(15) R.W. PROVISO 1 & 2 OF T HE I.T. ACT. 5. DURING THE YEAR, RS.27.09,948/- WAS RECEIVED BY BCA FROM BCC! UNDER THE HEAD CORPUS FUND IN THE NAME OF INFRASTRUCTURE SUBS IDY. THE ASSESSEE HAS TREATED THE SAID RECEIPT AS 'CORPUS DONATION' AND C LAIMED IT AS EXEMPT U/S 1 L(L)FD) OF THE ACT. 5.1 IN THIS REGARD, SHOWCAUSE DATED 26.11.2015, THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUESTED TO SHOWCAUSE AS TO WHY SAID DONATION SHOULD NOT BE TRE ATED AS ITS INCOME FOR THE PERIOD UNDER CONSIDERATION. 5.2 IN RESPONSE TO THE ABOVE SHOWCAUSE LETTER DATED 26.11,2015, A LETTER-DATED 06,02.2016 RECEIVED FROM THE ASSESSEE IS KEPT ON RE CORD. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE ABOVE REPLY IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER. 'VIDE POINT NO. (6) OF THE NOTICE DATED 26.! 1.2015 , YOUR KIND OFFICE HAS REFERRED SUBSIDY OF RS. 27,09,948/- RECEIVED FROM BCCJ. YOUR KIND OFFICE HAS STATED THAT WE HAVE FAILED TO PROVE THAT THIS DONATION IS TOWARDS CORPUS. THUS, WE HAVE BEEN SHOW CAUSED AS TO WHY THE DONATION SHOULD NOT HE TREATED AS INCOME FOR THE PERIOD UNDER CONSIDERATION. IN THIS REGARD WE WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT AS UNDER: WE SUBMIT THAT WE ARE AFFILIATED BODY OF BCCI WHICH PREDOMINANTLY FOCUSES ON DEVELOPMENT OF CRICKET IN INDICT. BCCI IS A NATI ONAL BODY WHICH MONITORS AND SUPERVISES THE FUNCTIONING OF ALL THE SUBORDINA TES IN PURSUANCE OF THE OBJECT OF THE ORGANIZATION. BCCI BEING MOTHER BODY IS ALSO RESPONSIBLE TO GIVE AIL KIND OJ SUPPORT EACH ASSOCIATION NEED IN ORDER TO DEVELOP AND MAINTAIN T HE CRICKET AND OTHER FUNCTIONING OF THE ASSOCIATION. BCC! ACCORDINGLY AS SISTS TILL THE ASSOCIATIONS AS PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF SPORTS. AS PER LIRE FUNCTIO NING OF WORKING COMMITTEE ON THE BCCI. EVERY YEAR THEY MONITOR THE TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT IN THE SPORTS VI.S A VIS FUNCTIONS OF THESE ASSOCIATIONS A ND ASSESS THE REQUIREMENT OF CRICKET KITS ACCESSORIES EQUIPMENTS ETC. AND ACCORD INGLY ALLOT EQUIPMENT AND OTHER SUPPORTS IN THE FORM OF SUBSIDY. PURSUANT TO ABOVE, DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERAT ION WE HAVE BEEN ALIENED EQUIPMENTS UNDER THE UMPIRING ASSESSMENT PROGRAM FR OM BCCI. THIS SUBSIDY IS NOT IN THE. FORM OF CASH RECEIPTS RATHER IT IS A LLOTMENT OF EQUIPMENT FROM BCCI FOR USAGE ONLY. COPY OF INTIMATION ISSUED BY B CCI AND COPIES OF HILLS ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 14 APPENDED THEREWITH IS ENCLOSED HEREWITH MARKED AS A NNEXURE-7. THESE INSTRUMENTS HAVE BEEN ALLOTTED SO AS TO IMPROVE THE SKILL AND PROFICIENCY OF UMPIRE SO THAT NOT ONLY QUALITY UMPIRING FACILITIES CAN HE ASSURED AT ALL THE NATIONAL AND RANJI LEVEL MATCHES HUT ALSO TO ASSURE INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS WHEN INTERNATIONAL MATCHES ARE BEING PLAYED AT VADODARA. THUS, YOUR KIND OFFICE WILL APPRECIATE THAT THE ABOVE ALLOTMENT OF EQUIPMENT UN DER THE UMPIRING ASSESSMENT PROGRAM IS NOT INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. I T IS SUBSIDY IN KIND FROM BCCI' 5,3 THE ABOVE REPLY RECEIVED FROM THE ASSESSEE IS CAREFULLY CONSIDERED BUR NOT ACCEPTABLE. , \ . THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION LL(L)(D) OF THE J.T. ACT EXEMPTS VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS WITH A SPECIFIC DIRECTION THAT: THE C ONTRIBUTION BE USED AS A CORPUS DONATION. HOWEVER, IN THE INSTANT CASE THERE IS NO SPECIFIC DIRECTION FROM THE BCCUI TO TREAT THE SAID AMOUNTS AS TOWARDS THE 'CORPUS FUND'. IF THE INTENTION OF THE DONOR WAS TO DONATE THIS AMOUNT: T OWARDS THE 'CORPUS FUND' OF THE ASSESSEE, THEN IT HAS TO BE SPECIFICALLY MENTIO NED. IN THE ABSENCE OF WRITTEN DIRECTION, A PARTICULAR DONATION CANNOT: BE CONSIDE RED AS 'CORPUS DONATION'. IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PR ODUCE ANY PARTICULAR DIRECTION FROM THE BCCJ IN THE FORM OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE EITHER FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION OR IN ANY OF THE EARLIER A SSESSMENTS. IN THIS CASE, THAT SPECIFIC DIRECTION IS CLEARLY MI SSING. THEREFORE, THE-SAID RECEIPT OF SUBSIDY HAS TO BE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST A ND IT CANNOT: BE EXEMPT U/S. LL(L)(D) OF THE I.T. ACT. THUS, THE INFRASTRUCTURE SUBSIDY RECEIVED BY THE AS SESSEE FROM BCCI OF RS. 27,09,948/'- IN THE FORM OF IS TREATED AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AS NO EVIDENCE WAS FURNISHED TO SHOW THAT THE VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTI ON WAS MADE WITH A SPECIFIC DIRECTION THAT THEY SHALL FORM PART OF THE CORPUS O F THE TRUST SO AS TO QUALIFY FOR THE EXEMPTION U/S L](L)(D) OF THE ACT. ON THE CONTR ARY, IF IS EVIDENT FROM THE LETTER DATED 25.03.2013 OF THE BCCI THAT THE SAID I NFRASTRUCTURE SUBSIDY IS ONLY ON ACCOUNT OF TRANSFER OF UMPIRING ASSESSMENT PROGR AM EQUIPMENTS TO THE AFFILIATED UNIT'S INVENTORY UNDER THE INTERNAL TRAN SFER OF CAPITAL GOODS BETWEEN BCCI AND BCA. ASSUMING, BUT NOT ACCEPTING THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS. 27,09,948/- RECEIVED AS 'INFRASTRUCTURE SUBSIDY' IS 'CORPUS DONATION' AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE, EVEN THEN, AS PER PROVISIONS OF SE C 13(8) OF THE L.T ACT, THE EXEMPTION CLAIMED U/S LL(L)(D) OF THE L.T ACT IS NO T ALLOWABLE IF THE PROVISIONS OF THE FIRST PROVISO TO SEC.2(15) OF THE L.T ACT BE COME APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE, AS DISCUSSED IN THE ORDER BELOW. IT HAS B EEN DISCUSSED IN THE PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS SQUARELY COVERED UN DER THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 2(15) R.W.S PROVISO 1 & 2 OF THE L.T ACT. FURTHER I T IS GATHERED THAT ABOVE AMOUNT OF RS. 27,09,94S/- IS NOT ROUTED THROUGH P & L ACCOUNT. ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 15 3. BUT LD. A.O. WAS NOT AGREE WITH THE CONTENTION OF T HE APPELLANT AND MADE ADDITION OF RS. 27,09,948/- AND TREATED THE SAID AM OUNT INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. THEREAFTER, ASSESSEE PREFERRED FIRST STATUTORY APPE AL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE RELEVANT RECORD AND IMPUGN ED ORDER. NOW QUESTION IS BEFORE US WHETHER ASSESSEE IS ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMP TION U/S. 11& 12 AND NEED TO SEE WHETHER ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE CHARITABLE A CTIVITIES OR NOT. 6. AT THE OUTSET, IN SUPPORT OF ITS CONTENTION, LD. A. R. CITED AN ORDER OF CO- ORDINATE BENCH IN THE CASE OF GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOC IATION VS. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), [2019] 10 1 TAXMANN.COM 453 (AHMEDABAD TRIBUNAL) WHEREIN ON SIMILAR GROUND FO R ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009- 10, RELIEF WAS GRANTED BY THE TRIBUNAL WITH FOLLOWI NG OBSERVATIONS: 129. WE WILL NOW TAKE UP THE APPEALS FILED BY BAROD A CRICKET ASSOCIATION. ITA NO: 336 /AHD/2015 130. THIS APPEAL CHALLENGES CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDE R DATED 7TH NOVEMBER, 2014 PASSED BY THE CIT(A) IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSME NT UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 131. GROUND NOS. 1 TO 3 CHALLENGE REASSESSMENT PRO CEEDINGS. HOWEVER, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT HE DO ES NOT WISH TO PRESS THESE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY, THESE THREE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE SUMMARILY DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 132. GROUND NOS. 1 TO 3 ARE DISMISSED. 133. IN GROUND NOS 4 TO 9, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED GRIEVANCE AGAINST THE CIT(A) UPHOLDING PROVISO TO SECTION 2(15) BEING INVOKED, A GAINST THE INCOME FROM CRICKETING ACTIVITIES BEING TREATED AS BUSINESS INC OME, AGAINST RESULTANT DENIAL OF EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11(1)(A), AND AGAINST CIT(A ) UPHOLDING THE VIEW OF THE AO OF TAXING INTEREST INCOME EARNED FROM CORPUS FUN DS, SURPLUS FUNDS AS NON- ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 16 CHARITABLE INCOME. THE DISPUTE BEFORE US ALSO INVOL VES THE TREATMENT OF RS 7,21,22,353 RECEIVED ON ACCOUNT OF CORPUS DONATION DESCRIBED AS TV SUBSIDY. 134. IN VIEW OF OUR FINDINGS ON THE CORE ISSUE IN T HESE APPEALS BEFORE US, AS SET OUT EARLIER IN THIS ORDER AT PAGES 2 TO 55 AND IN V IEW OF OUR DECISION ABOVE IN THE CASE OF GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION ON THE ISSUE OF TV SUBSIDY- AS SET OUT AT PAGES 56 TO 58 EARLIER IN THIS ORDER, THE ASSESSEE MUST S UCCEED ON THESE POINTS. LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES FAIRLY AGREE THAT WHATEVER WE DECID E IN THE CASE OF GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION, THE SAME WILL EQUALLY APPLY I N THIS CASE AS WELL. WE, THEREFORE, UPHOLD THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE AND ALLO W THESE GROUNDS OF APPEAL TO THAT EXTENT. 135. GROUND NOS. 4 TO 9 ARE ALLOWED IN THE TERMS IN DICATED ABOVE. 136. IN GROUND NO 9, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED AN ALT ERNATIVE PLEA TO THAT EFFECT THAT PROMOTING CRICKET IS COVERED BY EDUCATIONAL AC TIVITIES, AND, FOR THIS REASON, THE PROVISO TO SECTION 2 (15) CANNOT BE INVOKED. 137. AS WE HAVE ALLOWED THE MAIN PLEA OF THE ASSESS EE, AS SET OUT IN GROUND NOS. 4 TO 9, THIS PLEA IS RENDERED ACADEMIC AND DOE S NOT CALL FOR OUR ADJUDICATION AS ON NOW. 138. GROUND NO. 10 IS DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. 139. IN THE RESULT, ITA NO 336/AHD/15, I.E. ASSESSE ES APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 IS PARTLY ALLOWED IN THE T ERMS INDICATED ABOVE. ITA NO.: 2957/AHD/2014 140. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT HAS CHALLENGED CORRECTNESS OF LEARNED CIT(A)S ORDER DATED 6TH AUGUST 2014 IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, F OR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010- 11. 141. GROUND NOS, 1, 4, 5 AND 7, WHICH WE WILL TAKE UP TOGETHER, RAISE THE FOLLOWING GRIEVANCES: 1. THE C.I.T. (APPEALS) ERRED IN APPLYING THE P ROVISION OF SECTION 13(8) R.W.S.2(15) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AS RETURN W AS FILED BASED ON FINANCE ACT, 2009 AND ON THAT DAY SECTION 13(8) WAS NOT EVEN IN THE STATUE BOOK. 4. THE C.I.T. (APPEALS) ERRED IN NOT ALLOWING E XEMPTION U/S 11(L)(A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 BASED ON PROVISION OF SECTION 2(15) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 5. THE C.I.T. (APPEALS) ERRED IN TAXING THE INC OME FROM THE CRICKETING ACTIVITIES AS BUSINESS INCOME U/S 28 WITHOUT ESTABLISHING THE SAID ACTIVITIES AS IN NATURE OF BUSINESS TRADE OR COMMERCE. 7. THE C.I.T. (APPEALS) ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATI NG THAT IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS PASSED BASED ON THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR A.Y.2010-11 OF THE BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA ('BCCI' FOR SHORT) THAT TOO WITHOUT PROVIDING COPY OF SAID ORDER. ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 17 142. IN VIEW OF OUR FINDINGS ON THE CORE ISSUE IN T HESE APPEALS BEFORE US, AS SET OUT EARLIER IN THIS ORDER AT PAGES 2 TO 55 AND IN V IEW OF OUR DECISION ABOVE IN THE CASE OF GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION ON THE ISSUE, T HE ASSESSEE MUST SUCCEED ON THESE POINTS. LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES FAIRLY AGREE THAT WHATEVER WE DECIDE IN THE CASE OF GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION, THE SAME WILL EQUALLY APPLY IN THIS CASE AS WELL. WE, THEREFORE, UPHOLD THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSE E AND ALLOW THESE GROUNDS OF APPEAL TO THAT EXTENT IN PRINCIPLE. THERE IS, HOWEV ER, A RIDER. IN THIS CASE, THERE IS ALSO A REFERENCE TO THE ASSESSEE ORGANIZING A ONE D AY INTERNATIONAL MATCH, ON COMMERCIAL SCALE, FOR FUND RAISING. THAT ISSUE IS D EALT WITH IN A SEPARATE GROUND OF APPEAL. IN CASE, IT IS HELD THAT THE SAID ONE DA Y INTERNATIONAL MATCH IS IN THE NATURE OF COMMERCIAL ADVENTURE, IT WILL HAVE THE IM PACT ON SECTION 2(15) BEING INVOKED. THAT GROUND IS SEPARATELY BEING REMITTED T O THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION, AND THE EVENTUAL DECISION ON TH E SAME WILL ALSO HAVE THE IMPACT ON THESE ISSUES. WE, THEREFORE, REMIT THE MA TTER TO THE FILE OF THE CITI(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION IN THE LIGHT OF OUR OBSERVAT IONS IN THE CASE OF GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION (SUPRA) AND THE FINDINGS ON THE SAID ASPECT OF THE MATTER. 143. GROUND NOS. 1,4,5 AND 7 ARE ALLOWED IN THE TER MS INDICATED ABOVE. 144. IN GROUND NO. 2, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE F OLLOWING GRIEVANCE: 2. THE C.I.T. (APPEALS) ERRED IN WITHDRAWING EX EMPTION U/S 11(1)(D) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 OF RS.4 CR. RECEIVED IN THE FO RM OF CORPUS DONATION. 145. AS REGARDS GRIEVANCE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN GROUND NO. 3(A), WE HAVE ALREADY DECIDED THIS ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSE E, VIDE OUR ORDER OF EVEN DATE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004-05 TO 2007-08, AND WE HAVE OBSERVED AS FOLLOWS: 12. SO FAR AS THIS GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS CON CERNED, THE RELEVANT MATERIAL FACTS ARE LIKE THIS. THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US IS A CR ICKET ASSOCIATION, REGISTERED UNDER THE SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT 1860, AND IS ENGAGED IN PROMOTION OF CRICKET IN SPECIFIED AREAS OF GUJARAT STATE. IN THE COURSE OF THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS RECEI VED A SUM OF RS 1,58,00,000 FROM THE BOARD OF CRICKET CONTROL OF INDIA (BCCI, I N SHORT) AS TOWARDS THE TV RIGHTS. WHEN HE PROBED THE MATTER FURTHER, IT WAS E XPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT NOMENCLATURE OF THE RECEIPT APART, WHAT HAS BEEN RE CEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE IS A CORPUS DONATION AND THE ASSESSEE DID NOT HAVE ANY R IGHT TO GET THE SAID MONEY FROM THE BCCI, UNDER A CONTRACT OR OTHERWISE. IT WA S ALSO EXPLAINED THAT SIMILAR AMOUNTS RECEIVED IN THE EARLIER YEARS HAVE BEEN TRE ATED ALL ALONG AS CORPUS DONATIONS, AND, THEREFORE, THE CORPUS DONATION RECE IVED BY THE ASSESSEE, THOUGH TERMED AS TV RIGHTS, IS NOT TAXABLE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THIS CONTENTION AS ALSO THE FACT THAT UNDER SECTION 11(1)(D), WHAT CANNOT BE INCLUDED AS TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE IS INCOME BY WAY OF VOLUNTA RY CONTRIBUTIONS MADE WITH A SPECIFIC DIRECTION THAT THEY SHALL FORM PART OF THE CORPUS OF THE TRUST OR THE INSTITUTION. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE VIEW THAT WHAT HAS BEEN PAID TO THE ASSESSEE IS A SHARE OUT OF EARNINGS BY THE BCCI, OU T OF PROCEEDS OF SALE OF TV ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 18 RIGHTS, AND IS, AS SUCH, TAXABLE AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS OBSERVED THAT IT CANNOT BE SAID TO BE VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTION BY THE BCCI. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO SHOWS THAT AS ACCEPTED BY THE AUDITOR OF THE C OMPANY THE AMOUNT IS RELATABLE TO THE TV RIGHTS AND IT CANNOT, THEREFORE , BE TREATED AS VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTION IN THE NATURE OF CORPUS DONATIONS. HE ALSO NOTED THAT AS REGISTRATION OF THE ASSESSEE, UNDER SECTION 12AA, STANDS CANCELL ED, THE ASSESSEE IS ANYWAY NOT ELIGIBLE FOR THE BENEFIT OF SECTION 11(1)(D). ON TH E BASIS OF THIS LINE OF REASONING, THE ASSESSING OFFICER TREATED THE SAID AMOUNT OF RS 1,58,00,000 AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) BUT WITHOUT ANY SUCCESS. IT WAS POINTED OUT TO THE CIT( A) THAT THE BCCI HAS PASSED A SPECIFIC RESOLUTION THAT THE AMOUNT COMPUTED AS TV SUBSIDY IS GIVEN TO THE MEMBER ASSOCIATIONS AS CORPUS DONATION. THE CIT(A), IDENTIFIED THE CORE ISSUE FOR ADJUDICATION AS FOLLOWS: THE FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION WHICH NOW ARISES IS WHETHER THE SPECIFIC DIRECTION ONCE ISSUED IS SUFFICIENT FO R THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 11(1)(D) OR SPECIFIC DIRECTION IS REQUIRED FOR EACH YEAR IND IVIDUALLY. HE THEN PROCEEDED TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION BY OBSERVING AS FOLLOWS: AS PER SECTION 11(1)(D), A WRITTEN SPECIFIC DIRECTI ON IS NECESSARY TO CLAIM IT AS CORPUS DONATION. FOR A DONATION AS A CORPUS DONATIO N, A WRITTEN DOCUMENT WITH SPECIFIC DIRECTION FROM THE DONOR SHOULD BE OBTAINE D AND SHOULD ACCOMPANY THE DONATION FROM THE DONOR. IN ABSENCE OF WRITTEN DIRE CTION, FOR A DONATION IN A GIVEN ASSESSMENT YEAR, A DONATION WOULD NOT BE CONS IDERED AS A CORPUS DONATION AND THE ORGANIZATION (IN THIS CASE, GCA) WOULD NOT BE ENTITLED TO CLAIM FULL EXEMPTION. TO ADD, DONATION COVERED BY A WRITTEN DO CUMENT BUT WITHOUT ANY SPECIFIC DIRECTION CANNOT BE CLAIMED AS CORPUS DONA TION 13. THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SATISFIED AND IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE US. 14. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED TH E MATERIAL ON RECORD AND DULY CONSIDERED FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF T HE APPLICABLE LEGAL POSITION. 15. WE FIND THAT, AT PAGES 46 AND 47 OF THE PAPERBO OK, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED SPECIFIC CONFIRMATIONS TO THE EFFECT THAT THESE AMO UNTS WERE CORPUS DONATIONS. WE HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE BCCI RESOLUTION NO 5 DATED 29TH SEPTEMBER 2001 WHICH SPECIFICALLY STATES THAT THE TV SUBSIDIES SHOULD HE NCEFORTH BE SENT TO THE MEMBER ASSOCIATIONS TOWARDS CORPUS FUNDS. THERE IS NO DI SPUTE THAT THE TV SUBSIDY IN QUESTION IS SENT UNDER THIS RESOLUTION. ON THESE FA CTS, AND IN THE LIGHT OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 11(1)(D) WHICH ONLY REQUIRE T HE INCOME TO BE BY WAY OF VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS MADE WITH A SPECIFIC DIRECT ION THAT THEY SHALL FORM PART OF THE CORPUS OF THE TRUST OR THE INSTITUTION, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT ANY PAYMENTS MADE BY THE BCCI, WITHOUT A LEGAL OBLIGATI ON AND WITH A SPECIFIC DIRECTION THAT IT SHALL BE FOR CORPUS FUND- AS ADMI TTEDLY THE PRESENT RECEIPT IS, IS REQUIRED TO BE TREATED AS CORPUS DONATION NOT INCLU DIBLE IN TOTAL INCOME. WE ARE UNABLE TO FIND ANY LEGAL SUPPORT FOR LEARNED CIT(A) S STAND THAT EACH DONATION ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 19 MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A SEPARATE WRITTEN DOCUMENT. THE CONTRIBUTION HAS TO BE VOLUNTARY AND IT HAS TO BE WITH SPECIFIC DIRECTI ON THAT IT WILL FORM CORPUS OF THE TRUST. THESE CONDITIONS ARE CLEARLY SATISFIED. ANY PAYMENT WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS NOT UNDER AN OBLIGATION TO MAKE, WHATEVER BE THE MO DE OF ITS COMPUTATION, IS A VOLUNTARY PAYMENT, AND, ANY PAYMENT WHICH IS WITH A SPECIFIC DIRECTION THAT IT FOR CORPUS FUND IS A CORPUS DONATION. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, EVEN WITHOUT THE TWO SPECIFIC CONFIRMATIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, IN TH E LIGHT OF THE BCCI RESOLUTION UNDER WHICH THE PAYMENT IS MADE AND IN THE LIGHT OF THE PAYMENT NOT BEING UNDER ANY LEGAL OBLIGATION, THE CONDITIONS UNDER SE CTION 11(1)(D) ARE SATISFIED. WE, THEREFORE, UPHOLD THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS ACCORDINGLY DIRECTED TO DELETE THIS ADDITION OF RS 1,58,00,000. 146. WE SEE NO REASONS TO TAKE ANY OTHER VIEW OF TH E MATTER THAN THE VIEW SO TAKEN IN THE CASE OF GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION. R ESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAME, WE UPHOLD THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE AND DIRECT THE A SSESSING OFFICER TO TREAT THE TV SUBSIDY OF RS 4,00,00,000 RECEIVED FROM THE BC CI AS A CORPUS DONATION. THE ASSESSEE GETS THE RELIEF ACCORDINGLY. 147. GROUND NO. 2 IS ALLOWED IN THE TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. 148. IN GROUND NO. 3, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE F OLLOWING GRIEVANCE: 3. THE C.I.T. (APPEALS) ERRED IN WITHDRAWING EX EMPTION U/S 11(1)(D) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 OF RS.30,53,888/- RECEIVED IN THE FORM OF CORPUS DONATION IN FORM OF INFRASTRUCTURE SUBSIDY. 149. LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES FAIRLY AGREE THAT THIS ISSUE IS ALSO COVERED BY OUR DECISION IN THE CASE OF GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION , AND WHATEVER WE DECIDE IN THE SAID CASE WILL EQUALLY APPLY IN THE PRESENT CASE AS WELL. 150. VIDE OUR DECISION EARLIER IN THIS ORDER, WE HA VE UPHELD SIMILAR CLAIM OF GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION AND OBSERVED, INTER ALI A, AS FOLLOWS: 51. ON A PERUSAL OF THE BCCI INFRASTRUCTURE SUBSIDY RULES, WE FIND THAT WHAT IS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE AS INFRASTRUCTURE SUBSIDY IS REIMBURSEMENT OF 50% OF COSTS IN RESPECT OF CERTAIN EXPENDITURE ON INFRASTRUCTURE WHICH IS INHERENTLY IN THE CAPITAL FIELD. THE MERE FACT THAT IT IS NOT A REIMB URSEMENT TO AN OUTSIDE PARTY, SUCH AS A DISTRICT CRICKET ASSOCIATION, DOES NOT RE ALLY MATTER. AS LONG AS THE SUBSIDY IS RELATABLE TO A CAPITAL ASSET CREATED BY THE ASSESSEE ON HIS OWN OR BY AN ELIGIBLE DISTRICT CRICKET ASSOCIATION, AS THE PRESE NT SUBSIDY UNDISPUTEDLY IS, IT IS OUTSIDE THE AMBIT OF REVENUE RECEIPT AND TAXABLE IN COME. THE VERY FOUNDATION OF THE STAND OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS THUS DEVOID O F LEGALLY SUSTAINABLE MERITS. AS SUCH, THERE CAN HARDLY BE AN OCCASION, IN PRINCIPLE , TO HOLD SUCH A SUBSIDY AS A REVENUE RECEIPT OR TAXABLE INCOME. THERE IS NOT EVE N A WHISPER OF A DISCUSSION BY ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 20 THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO THE EFFECT THAT INFRASTRUC TURE SUBSIDY IS REVENUE IN NATURE. AS A MATTER OF FACT, THE CLAIM IS MADE FOR THE SUBS IDY ONLY AFTER THE EXPENDITURE HAVING BEEN INCURRED. THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE SI MPLY BRUSHED ASIDE THE CASE AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND PROCEEDED T O HOLD IT AS AN INCOME. LOOKING TO THE NATURE OF THE SUBSIDY, WHICH IS CLEA RLY RELATABLE TO THE CAPITAL ASSETS GENERATED, WE ARE UNABLE TO HOLD THIS RECEIP T IN THE REVENUE FIELD. WE, THEREFORE, UPHOLD THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE ON THIS POINT AS WELL AND DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS 2,13,34,033. 151. WE SEE NO REASONS TO TAKE A DIFFERENT VIEW, IN PRINCIPLE, IN THIS CASE. HOWEVER, AS RELEVANT FACTS NED TO BE EXAMINED, THE MATTER IS REMITTED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION, IN THE LIGHT OF OUR ABOVE OBSERVATIONS. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 152. GROUND NO. 3 IS THUS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL P URPOSES IN THE TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. 153. IN GROUND NO. 6, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE F OLLOWING GRIEVANCE: 6. THE C.I.T. (APPEALS) ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT HOSTING OF ONE DAY INTERNATIONAL MATCH ('ODI' FOR SHORT) IS ONE OFF ADVENTURE TO RAISE FUNDS TO CARRY OUT OBJECTS OF THE TRUST. THE INCOME FROM SAI D ODI CANNOT TAKE COLOUR OF COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES OR INCOME. 154. WE FIND THAT THOUGH THERE ARE FINDINGS TO THE ABOVE EFFECT IN THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE CIT(A) HAS DEALT WITH TH E SAME IN A VERY CAUSAL MANNER AND WITHOUT SPECIFIC AND CATEGORICAL DISCUSSIONS ON THE SAME. WE, THEREFORE, DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO REMIT THE MATTER TO THE F ILE OF THE CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE. WE ORDER SO. AS WE DO SO, AND FOR THE DETAILED REAS ONS SET OUT EARLIER WHILE DEALING WITH GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATIONS CASE, WE MAKE IT CLEAR THAT IT IS ONLY IN THE EVENT OF THIS EVENT BEING ORGANIZED BY THE APPE LLANT CRICKET ASSOCIATION ON ITS OWN, RATHER THAN UNDER ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANNING BY THE BCCI, THAT THIS COULD BE PUT AGAINST THE ASSESSEE AS AN ADVENTURE IN THE NATURE OF TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS. 155. GROUND NO. 6 IS THUS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL P URPOSES IN THE ABOVE TERMS. 156. IN GROUND NO. 8, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE F OLLOWING GRIEVANCE: 8. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ABOVE THE C.I.T. (APPEAL S) ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING OBJECTS OF IMPARTING OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT CRICKET IS PROMOTION OF EDUCATION AS IT IS ONE OF THE CHAPTER IN THE PHYSICAL EDUCATION AND IT IS FALLS UNDER EDUCATIONAL PURPOSE UNDER CHARITABLE PURPOSE U/S 2(15) OF THE I NCOME TAX 1961 AND ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 21 THEREFORE IT DOES NOT ATTRACT PROVISO TO SECTION 2( 15) OF THE ACT ACCORDINGLY PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(8) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ARE NOT APPLICABLE. 157. AS WE HAVE ALLOWED THE MAIN PLEA OF THE ASSESS EE, AS SET OUT IN GROUND NOS. 4 TO 9, THIS PLEA IS RENDERED ACADEMIC AND DOE S NOT CALL FOR OUR ADJUDICATION AS ON NOW. 158. GROUND NO. 8 IS DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. 159. IN THE RESULT, ITA NO 2957/AHD/14, I.E. ASSESS EES APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 IS PARTLY ALLOWED IN THE T ERMS INDICATED ABOVE. ITA NO. 337/AHD/ 15 160. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLE NGED CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 10TH NOVEMBER 2014 PASSED BY THE CIT(A) IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX A CT, 1961, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. 161. IN GROUND NO. 1, THE GRIEVANCE RAISED BY THE A SSESSEE WAS AS FOLLOWS: THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING ADDITION OF RS.1, 77,788/- OF INTEREST IN INCOME TAX REFUND WHICH WAS ALREADY SHOWN AS INCOME ON 31. 03.2013 I.E. IN FINANCIAL YEAR 2012-13, AS NECESSARY INTIMATION HAS BEEN RECE IVED IN F.Y. 2012-2013. 162. AS NO SPECIFIC ARGUMENTS HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED I N RESPECT OF THE ABOVE GRIEVANCE, AND CONSIDERING SMALLNESS OF THE AMOUNT, IT IS TREATED AS NOT PRESSED. IT IS, ACCORDINGLY, DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 163. GROUND NO. 1 IS THUS DISMISSED. 164. IN GROUND NOS. 2, 3, 4, 7, 8 AND 9, WHICH WE W ILL TAKE UP TOGETHER, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GRIEVANCES: 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF APPELLANTS CA SE AS WELL AS IN LAW, IT IS PRAYED THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(8) R.W.S. 2(15) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 SHOULD NOT BE MADE APPLICABLE AS RETURN WAS FI LED BASED ON FINANCE ACT, 2009 AND ON THAT DAY SECTION 13(8) WAS NOT EVEN IN THE STATUTE BOOK. 3. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING VIEW OF THE L D. AO OF APPLYING THE PROVISION OF SECTION 13(8) R.W.S. 2(15) OF THE INCO ME TAX ACT, 1961 ON WHOLE OF THE INCOME OF YOUR APPELLANT WHEREAS SECTION 13(8) CLEARLY SPEAKS ABOUT DENYING EXEMPTION TO SUCH INCOME WHICH IS COVERED BY PROVIS O TO SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT AND NOT ENTIRE INCOME. 4. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THAT TH E LD. AO HAS MADE HIGH PITCHED ASSESSMENT BY TAKING BASE FROM THE ASSESSME NT ORDER FOR A.Y. 2010-11 PASSED IN THE CASE OF THE BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRIC KET IN INDIA (BCCI FOR SHORT) THAT TOO WITHOUT PROVIDING COPY OF SAID ORDER TO AP PELLANT. ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 22 7. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING VIEW OF LD. AO OF NOT ALLOWING EXEMPTION U/S.11(1)(A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ON PROVISI ON OF SECTION 2(15) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 8. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING VIEW OF LD. AO OF TAXING THE INCOME OF APPELLANT FROM THE CRICKETING ACTIVITIES AS BUSINES S INCOME U/S.28 WITHOUT ESTABLISHING THE SAID ACTIVITIES AS IN NATURE OF BU SINESS TRADE OR COMMERCE. 9. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING VIEW OF LD. AO OF TAXING INTEREST INCOME EARNED FROM CORPUS FUNDS/SURPLUS FUNDS AS NON-CHARI TABLE INCOME. 165. IN VIEW OF OUR FINDINGS ON THE CORE ISSUE IN T HESE APPEALS BEFORE US, AS SET OUT EARLIER IN THIS ORDER AT PAGES 2 TO 55 AND IN V IEW OF OUR DECISION ABOVE IN THE CASE OF GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION ON THE ISSUE, T HE ASSESSEE MUST SUCCEED ON THESE POINTS. LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES FAIRLY AGREE THAT WHATEVER WE DECIDE IN THE CASE OF GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION, THE SAME WILL EQUALLY APPLY IN THIS CASE AS WELL. WE, THEREFORE, UPHOLD THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSE E AND ALLOW THESE GROUNDS OF APPEAL TO THAT EXTENT IN PRINCIPLE. THERE IS, HOWEV ER, A RIDER. IN THIS CASE, THERE IS ALSO A REFERENCE TO THE ASSESSEE ORGANIZING A ONE D AY INTERNATIONAL MATCH, ON COMMERCIAL SCALE, FOR FUND RAISING. THAT ISSUE IS D EALT WITH IN A SEPARATE GROUND OF APPEAL. IN CASE, IT IS HELD THAT THE SAID ONE DA Y INTERNATIONAL MATCH IS IN THE NATURE OF COMMERCIAL ADVENTURE, IT WILL HAVE THE IM PACT ON SECTION 2(15) BEING INVOKED. THAT GROUND IS SEPARATELY BEING REMITTED T O THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION, AND THE EVENTUAL DECISION ON TH E SAME WILL ALSO HAVE THE IMPACT ON THESE ISSUES. WE, THEREFORE, REMIT THE MA TTER TO THE FILE OF THE CITI(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION IN THE LIGHT OF OUR OBSERVAT IONS IN THE CASE OF GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION (SUPRA) AND THE FINDINGS ON THE SAID ASPECT OF THE MATTER. 166. GROUND NOS. 2,3,4,7,8 AND 9 ARE ALLOWED IN THE TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. 167. IN GROUND NO. 5, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE F OLLOWING GRIEVANCE: THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING VIEW OF LD. AO OF WITHDRAWING EXEMPTION U/S 11(1)(D) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 OF RS.10.53 CR . RECEIVED IN THE FORM OF CORPUS DONATION. 168. THE ABOVE GRIEVANCE, WHICH PERTAINS TO THE TV SUBSIDY RECEIVED AS CORPUS DONATION, IS ALSO A COVERED ISSUE NOW IN ASSESSEES OWN CASES FOR THE PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEARS. 169. VIDE OUR DECISION EARLIER IN THIS ORDER, WE HA VE UPHELD SIMILAR CLAIM OF GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION AS ALSO IN ASSESSEES O WN CASES, AND OBSERVED, INTER ALIA, AS FOLLOWS: 12. SO FAR AS THIS GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS CON CERNED, THE RELEVANT MATERIAL FACTS ARE LIKE THIS. THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US IS A CR ICKET ASSOCIATION, REGISTERED UNDER ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 23 THE SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT 1860, AND IS ENGAGED IN PROMOTION OF CRICKET IN SPECIFIED AREAS OF GUJARAT STATE. IN THE COURSE OF THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS RECEI VED A SUM OF RS 1,58,00,000 FROM THE BOARD OF CRICKET CONTROL OF INDIA (BCCI, I N SHORT) AS TOWARDS THE TV RIGHTS. WHEN HE PROBED THE MATTER FURTHER, IT WAS E XPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT NOMENCLATURE OF THE RECEIPT APART, WHAT HAS BEEN RE CEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE IS A CORPUS DONATION AND THE ASSESSEE DID NOT HAVE ANY R IGHT TO GET THE SAID MONEY FROM THE BCCI, UNDER A CONTRACT OR OTHERWISE. IT WA S ALSO EXPLAINED THAT SIMILAR AMOUNTS RECEIVED IN THE EARLIER YEARS HAVE BEEN TRE ATED ALL ALONG AS CORPUS DONATIONS, AND, THEREFORE, THE CORPUS DONATION RECE IVED BY THE ASSESSEE, THOUGH TERMED AS TV RIGHTS, IS NOT TAXABLE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THIS CONTENTION AS ALSO THE FACT THAT UNDER SECTION 11(1)(D), WHAT CANNOT BE INCLUDED AS TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE IS INCOME BY WAY OF VOLUNTA RY CONTRIBUTIONS MADE WITH A SPECIFIC DIRECTION THAT THEY SHALL FORM PART OF THE CORPUS OF THE TRUST OR THE INSTITUTION. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE VIEW THAT WHAT HAS BEEN PAID TO THE ASSESSEE IS A SHARE OUT OF EARNINGS BY THE BCCI, OU T OF PROCEEDS OF SALE OF TV RIGHTS, AND IS, AS SUCH, TAXABLE AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS OBSERVED THAT IT CANNOT BE SAID TO BE VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTION BY THE BCCI. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO SHOWS THAT AS ACCEPTED BY THE AUDITOR OF THE C OMPANY THE AMOUNT IS RELATABLE TO THE TV RIGHTS AND IT CANNOT, THEREFORE , BE TREATED AS VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTION IN THE NATURE OF CORPUS DONATIONS. HE ALSO NOTED THAT AS REGISTRATION OF THE ASSESSEE, UNDER SECTION 12AA, STANDS CANCELL ED, THE ASSESSEE IS ANYWAY NOT ELIGIBLE FOR THE BENEFIT OF SECTION 11(1)(D). ON TH E BASIS OF THIS LINE OF REASONING, THE ASSESSING OFFICER TREATED THE SAID AMOUNT OF RS 1,58,00,000 AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) BUT WITHOUT ANY SUCCESS. IT WAS POINTED OUT TO THE CIT( A) THAT THE BCCI HAS PASSED A SPECIFIC RESOLUTION THAT THE AMOUNT COMPUTED AS TV SUBSIDY IS GIVEN TO THE MEMBER ASSOCIATIONS AS CORPUS DONATION. THE CIT(A), IDENTIFIED THE CORE ISSUE FOR ADJUDICATION AS FOLLOWS: THE FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION WHICH NOW ARISES IS WHETHER THE SPECIFIC DIRECTION ONCE ISSUED IS SUFFICIENT FO R THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 11(1)(D) OR SPECIFIC DIRECTION IS REQUIRED FOR EACH YEAR IND IVIDUALLY. HE THEN PROCEEDED TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION BY OBSERVING AS FOLLOWS: AS PER SECTION 11(1)(D), A WRITTEN SPECIFIC DIRECTI ON IS NECESSARY TO CLAIM IT AS CORPUS DONATION. FOR A DONATION AS A CORPUS DONATIO N, A WRITTEN DOCUMENT WITH SPECIFIC DIRECTION FROM THE DONOR SHOULD BE OBTAINE D AND SHOULD ACCOMPANY THE DONATION FROM THE DONOR. IN ABSENCE OF WRITTEN DIRE CTION, FOR A DONATION IN A GIVEN ASSESSMENT YEAR, A DONATION WOULD NOT BE CONS IDERED AS A CORPUS DONATION AND THE ORGANIZATION (IN THIS CASE, GCA) WOULD NOT BE ENTITLED TO CLAIM FULL EXEMPTION. TO ADD, DONATION COVERED BY A WRITTEN DO CUMENT BUT WITHOUT ANY SPECIFIC DIRECTION CANNOT BE CLAIMED AS CORPUS DONA TION 13. THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SATISFIED AND IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE US. ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 24 14. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED TH E MATERIAL ON RECORD AND DULY CONSIDERED FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF T HE APPLICABLE LEGAL POSITION. 15. WE FIND THAT, AT PAGES 46 AND 47 OF THE PAPERBO OK, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED SPECIFIC CONFIRMATIONS TO THE EFFECT THAT THESE AMO UNTS WERE CORPUS DONATIONS. WE HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE BCCI RESOLUTION NO 5 DATED 29TH SEPTEMBER 2001 WHICH SPECIFICALLY STATES THAT THE TV SUBSIDIES SHOULD HE NCEFORTH BE SENT TO THE MEMBER ASSOCIATIONS TOWARDS CORPUS FUNDS. THERE IS NO DI SPUTE THAT THE TV SUBSIDY IN QUESTION IS SENT UNDER THIS RESOLUTION. ON THESE FA CTS, AND IN THE LIGHT OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 11(1)(D) WHICH ONLY REQUIRE T HE INCOME TO BE BY WAY OF VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS MADE WITH A SPECIFIC DIRECT ION THAT THEY SHALL FORM PART OF THE CORPUS OF THE TRUST OR THE INSTITUTION, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT ANY PAYMENTS MADE BY THE BCCI, WITHOUT A LEGAL OBLIGATI ON AND WITH A SPECIFIC DIRECTION THAT IT SHALL BE FOR CORPUS FUND- AS ADMI TTEDLY THE PRESENT RECEIPT IS, IS REQUIRED TO BE TREATED AS CORPUS DONATION NOT INCLU DIBLE IN TOTAL INCOME. WE ARE UNABLE TO FIND ANY LEGAL SUPPORT FOR LEARNED CIT(A) S STAND THAT EACH DONATION MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A SEPARATE WRITTEN DOCUMENT. THE CONTRIBUTION HAS TO BE VOLUNTARY AND IT HAS TO BE WITH SPECIFIC DIRECTI ON THAT IT WILL FORM CORPUS OF THE TRUST. THESE CONDITIONS ARE CLEARLY SATISFIED. ANY PAYMENT WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS NOT UNDER AN OBLIGATION TO MAKE, WHATEVER BE THE MO DE OF ITS COMPUTATION, IS A VOLUNTARY PAYMENT, AND, ANY PAYMENT WHICH IS WITH A SPECIFIC DIRECTION THAT IT FOR CORPUS FUND IS A CORPUS DONATION. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, EVEN WITHOUT THE TWO SPECIFIC CONFIRMATIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, IN TH E LIGHT OF THE BCCI RESOLUTION UNDER WHICH THE PAYMENT IS MADE AND IN THE LIGHT OF THE PAYMENT NOT BEING UNDER ANY LEGAL OBLIGATION, THE CONDITIONS UNDER SE CTION 11(1)(D) ARE SATISFIED. WE, THEREFORE, UPHOLD THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS ACCORDINGLY DIRECTED TO DELETE THIS ADDITION OF RS 1,58,00,000 170. WE SEE NO REASONS TO TAKE A DIFFERENT VIEW, IN PRINCIPLE, IN THIS CASE. HOWEVER, AS RELEVANT FACTS NED TO BE EXAMINED, THE MATTER IS REMITTED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION, IN THE LIGHT OF OUR ABOVE OBSERVATIONS. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 171. GROUND NO.5 IS THUS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PU RPOSES IN THE TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. 172. IN GROUND NO. 6, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE F OLLOWING GRIEVANCE: THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING VIEW OF LD. AO OF WITHDRAWING EXEMPTION U/S 11(1)(D) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 OF RS.1.92 CR. RECEIVED IN THE FORM OF CORPUS DONATION. 173. THIS AMOUNT OF RS 1.92 CRORES, AS EVIDENT FROM THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, IS IN RESPECT OF INFRASTRUCTURE SUBSIDY. LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 25 FAIRLY AGREE THAT THIS ISSUE IS ALSO COVERED BY OUR DECISION IN THE CASE OF GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION, AND WHATEVER WE DECIDE IN THE SAID CASE WILL EQUALLY APPLY IN THE PRESENT CASE AS WELL. 174. VIDE OUR DECISION EARLIER IN THIS ORDER, WE HA VE UPHELD SIMILAR CLAIM OF GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION AND OBSERVED, INTER ALI A, AS FOLLOWS: 51. ON A PERUSAL OF THE BCCI INFRASTRUCTURE SUBSIDY RULES, WE FIND THAT WHAT IS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE AS INFRASTRUCTURE SUBSIDY IS REIMBURSEMENT OF 50% OF COSTS IN RESPECT OF CERTAIN EXPENDITURE ON INFRASTRUCTURE WHICH IS INHERENTLY IN THE CAPITAL FIELD. THE MERE FACT THAT IT IS NOT A REIMB URSEMENT TO AN OUTSIDE PARTY, SUCH AS A DISTRICT CRICKET ASSOCIATION, DOES NOT RE ALLY MATTER. AS LONG AS THE SUBSIDY IS RELATABLE TO A CAPITAL ASSET CREATED BY THE ASSESSEE ON HIS OWN OR BY AN ELIGIBLE DISTRICT CRICKET ASSOCIATION, AS THE PRESE NT SUBSIDY UNDISPUTEDLY IS, IT IS OUTSIDE THE AMBIT OF REVENUE RECEIPT AND TAXABLE IN COME. THE VERY FOUNDATION OF THE STAND OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS THUS DEVOID O F LEGALLY SUSTAINABLE MERITS. AS SUCH, THERE CAN HARDLY BE AN OCCASION, IN PRINCIPLE , TO HOLD SUCH A SUBSIDY AS A REVENUE RECEIPT OR TAXABLE INCOME. THERE IS NOT EVE N A WHISPER OF A DISCUSSION BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO THE EFFECT THAT INFRASTRUC TURE SUBSIDY IS REVENUE IN NATURE. AS A MATTER OF FACT, THE CLAIM IS MADE FOR THE SUBS IDY ONLY AFTER THE EXPENDITURE HAVING BEEN INCURRED. THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE SI MPLY BRUSHED ASIDE THE CASE AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND PROCEEDED T O HOLD IT AS AN INCOME. LOOKING TO THE NATURE OF THE SUBSIDY, WHICH IS CLEA RLY RELATABLE TO THE CAPITAL ASSETS GENERATED, WE ARE UNABLE TO HOLD THIS RECEIP T IN THE REVENUE FIELD. WE, THEREFORE, UPHOLD THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE ON THIS POINT AS WELL AND DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS 2,13,34,033. 175. WE SEE NO REASONS TO TAKE A DIFFERENT VIEW, IN PRINCIPLE, IN THIS CASE. HOWEVER, AS RELEVANT FACTS NED TO BE EXAMINED, THE MATTER IS REMITTED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION, IN THE LIGHT OF OUR ABOVE OBSERVATIONS. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 176. GROUND NO. 6 IS THUS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL P URPOSES IN THE TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. 177. IN GROUND NO. 10, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GRIEVANCE: THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACT T HAT HOSTING OF ONE DAY INTERNATIONAL MATCH (ODI FOR SHORT) IS ONE OF ADV ENTURE TO RAISE FUNDS TO CARRY OUT OBJECTS OF THE TRUST. THE INCOME FROM SAID ODI CANNOT TAKE COLOUR OF COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES OR INCOME. 178. WE FIND THAT THOUGH THERE ARE FINDINGS TO THE ABOVE EFFECT IN THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE CIT(A) HAS DEALT WITH TH E SAME IN A VERY CAUSAL MANNER ITA NO. 1435 /AHD/2015 . A.Y. 2013- 14 26 AND WITHOUT SPECIFIC AND CATEGORICAL DISCUSSIONS ON THE SAME. WE, THEREFORE, DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO REMIT THE MATTER TO THE F ILE OF THE CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE. WE ORDER SO. AS WE DO SO, AND FOR THE DETAILED REAS ONS SET OUT EARLIER WHILE DEALING WITH GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATIONS CASE, WE MAKE IT CLEAR THAT IT IS ONLY IN THE EVENT OF THIS EVENT BEING ORGANIZED BY THE APPE LLANT CRICKET ASSOCIATION ON ITS OWN, RATHER THAN UNDER ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANNING BY THE BCCI, THAT THIS COULD BE PUT AGAINST THE ASSESSEE AS AN ADVENTURE IN THE NATURE OF TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS. 7. IN PARITY WITH THE ABOVE SAID JUDGMENT OF CO-ORDINA TE BENCH, WE ALLOW THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLO WED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 10- 07- 2019 SD/- SD/- (WASEEM AHMED) (MAHAVIR PRASAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TRUE COPY JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 10/07/2019 RAJESH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR., ITAT, AHMEDABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT,AHME DABAD