ADVERTISING AGENCIES ASSOCIATION OF INDIA, MUMBAI V. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (E)-II (2), MUMBAI

ITA 2072/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6959 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-03-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 31-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHAITANYA ANJANIA
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Question of law; Set aside
• Section: 143(3); 12A; 10B; 12; 11

Judgement Text

A IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, MUM BAI , BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AAYAKR APILA SAM AAYAKR APILA SAM AAYAKR APILA SAM AAYAKR APILA SAM . / ITA NO. 2072/MUM/2016 ( INAQA-ARNA BAYA- / ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12) ADVERTISING AGENCIES ASSOCIATION OF INDIA, B-502, MARATHON FUTUREX, NM JOSHI MARG, LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI- 400 013 VS. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (E)-11(2) 5RH FLOOR, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS PAREL, LALBAUAG, MUMBAI-400 012 ( APILAAQAI APILAAQAI APILAAQAI APILAAQAI - -- - / APPELLANT) .. ( P`%YAQAAI P`%YAQAAI P`%YAQAAI P`%YAQAAI- -- - / RESPONDENT) . / PAN NO. AAATA5800E ! / APPELLANT BY : S/SHRI KAMAL SAWHNEY ABHISHEK TILAK, ARS #$ ! / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI CHAITANYA ANJANIA, DR ! '( / DATE OF HEARING: 19-12-2018 ! '( / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 1.03-2019 AADOSA AADOSA AADOSA AADOSA / O R D E R , / PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS ARISING OUT OF THE O RDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-1, MUMBAI [IN SHORT CIT(A)], IN APPEAL NO. CIT(A)-I/E-II (86)/2014-15 VIDE ORDER DA TED 28.01.2016. THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED BY THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (E), 2 ITA NO. 2072/MUM/2016 CIRCLE II(2), MUMBAI (IN SHORT ADIT/ITO/ AO) FOR THE A.Y. 2011-12 VIDE ORDER DATED 27.03.2014 UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER THE ACT). 2. THE ONLY ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS AGA INST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO HAVING EXEMP TION TO THE ASSESSEE UNDER THE PROVISION OF SECTION II TO SECTION 13 REA D WITH SECTION 2(15) ON THE FOLLOWING TWO ISSUES (I) ADDITION OF INTEREST O F RS. 30,62,564/- RECEIVED ON ACCOUNT OF FIXED DEPOSITS AND SAVINGS ACCOUNT (I I) ADDITION OF RS. 1,03,08,215/- RECEIVED ON ACCOUNT OF GOA FEST 2010. FOR THIS ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING FIVE GROUNDS: - 1. ON THE FACTS, AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, AND IN LAW, THE LEANED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL) ('CIT(A)' HAS LEGALLY ERRED IN DENYING EXEMPTION TO APPLICANT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION II TO SECTION 13 READ WITH SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT. 2. ON THE FACTS, AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE EASE, AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT'(A) HAS LEGALLY ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE APPELLANT IS CARRYING ON AN ACTIVITY IN THE NATURE OF TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS, OR AN ACTIVITY OF RENDERING ANY SERVICE I N RELATION TO ANY TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS FOR A CESS OR FEE OR ANY OTHER CONSIDERATION. 3. ON THE FACTS, AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS LEGALLY ERRED IN HOLDING THAT ANNUAL ACTIVITY OF 'GOA FEST 3 ITA NO. 2072/MUM/2016 2010' AN ACTIVITY FILLING WELL WITHIN THE APPROVED OBJECTS OF THE ASSOCIATION WHEREIN GLOBAL LEADERS O F ADVERTISING WORLD ARE INVITED TO SPEAK AND SHARE KNOWLEDGE, SO VITAL TO THE MEMBERS OF THE ASSOCIATION, AMOUNTS TO CARING ON AN IMPERMISSIBLE ACTIVITY IN THE NATURE OF ANY TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS LEGALLY ERRED IN HOLDING THAT INTEREST OF RS 30,62,564 RECEIVED ON MONEYS DEPOSITED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS TO SECTION II TO SECTION 13 OF THE A CT ARE NOT EXEMPT UNDER THOSE SECTIONS. 5. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, AND IN LAW, THE HONBLE CIT(A) HAS LEGALLY ERRED IN NOT DEALING WITH MOST RELEVANT CASES PRESSED INTO SERVICE IN THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS AND DISMISSING THEM WITH A BALD STATEMENT. 3. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS TR ADE ASSOCIATION TRUSTS REGISTERED WITH THE SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT 1860 VIDE REGISTRATION NO. F 6529 (BOM) DATED 20.01.1981 AND FURTHER UNDER SEC TION 12A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 VIDE N:INS/14183. THE ASSESSEE FILED COMPLETE ADDED ACCOUNTS I.E. INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT, BALANCE SHEET AND AUDIT REPORT IN FORM NO. 10B CLAIMING EXEMPTION UND ER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT. THE AO DENIED EXEMPTION ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST OF RS. 30,62,564/- AND RECEIVED ON FIXED DEPOSIT AND INCOME ON ACCOUNT OF GOA FEST 2010 AMOUNTING TO RS. 1,13,08,215/-. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE PREFERRED THE 4 ITA NO. 2072/MUM/2016 APPEAL BEFORE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) REITERATED THE AS SESSMENT ORDER AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITION VIDE PARA 6 AS UNDER: - 6. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, GONE THROUGH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OF THE A.O AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT AND ALSO DISCUSSED THE CASE WITH THE AR OF THE APPELLANT. THE CONTENTIONS AND SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT ARE BEING DISCUSSED AND DECIDED HERE IN UNDER: I. IN GROUND NO. 1, THE APPELLANT HAS DISPUTED THE TAXABILITY OF INTEREST INCOME RECEIVED FROM FIXED DEPOSITS. THE APPELLANT HAS NOT MADE ANY SPECIFIC SUBMISSIONS WITH REFERENCE TO THIS GROUND. ON THE OTHER HAND THE AO RELYING UPON THE JUDGMENTS OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN RANCHI CLUB LTD, BANKIPUR CLUB LTD, AND THE JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN COMMON EFFLUENT TREATMENT PLANT (SUPRA) HAS HELD THIS INCOME AS TAXABLE. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THESE JUDGMENTS FINDINGS OF THE AO IN HIS ORDER ARE UPHELD, G. NO. 1 OF APPEAL IS, THEREFORE DISMISSED. II. IN GROUND NO. 2 THE APPELLANT HAS DISPUTED THE TAXABILITY OF INCOME FROM 'GOA PEST 2010'. AO HAD OBSERVED THAT THE ENTIRE INCOME RECEIVED ON ACCOUNT OF GOA FEST IS HIT BY FIRST PROVISO TO SECTION 2(15). THE 5 ITA NO. 2072/MUM/2016 APPELLANT IN THIS REGARD SUBMITTED THAT IT IS NOT CARRYING OUT ANY ACTIVITY IN THE NATURE OF TRADE OR RENDERING SERVICE IN RELATION TO ANY TRADE FOR TEE. HOWEVER, ON PERUSAL OF THE DETAILS REGARDING THE RECEIPTS OF GOA FEST 261 IT IS NOTED THAT THE APPELLANT HAS RECEIVED RS. 4.66 CRORES FROM NON-MEMBERS. THE LIST OF NON-MEMBERS INCLUDES STATE BANK OF INDIA, AIRTEL, WHO ARE NEITHER IN THE ADVERTISEMENT BUSINESS NOR MEMBERS OF THE APPELLANT. ALSO, THE DELEGATE FEE FROM NON-MEMBERS INCLUDE NAMES LIKE THE SWEET SHOP AGRAN SOCIAL WELFARE SOCIETY, BLUE STAR LTD, BHARTI AIRTEL, NESTLE INDIA, HDFC BANK, ETC., WHO HAVE NO RELATION TO THE ADVERTISEMENT BUSINESS AS EVIDENT FROM THEIR NAME ITSELF. ALSO, THE NON MEMBER DELEGATES INCLUDE INDIVIDUAL NAMES LIKE KARAN RAWAT, AJAY KAKKAD, SONAL AGARWAL, AJAY CHANDWANI, NEHA PANDEY AND SHOURI GUPTA. FROM THESE FACTS, IT MAY BE NOTED THAT THE GOA REST 2010 WAS NOT MEANT EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE ENTITIES ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF ADVERTISEMENT BUT WAS OPEN FOR ALL, FOR WHICH HUGE FEES WAS CHARGED. AS PER INCOME AND EXPENDITURE A/C THE TOTAL RECEIPTS WERE RS. 6.95 CRORES. FURTHER, IT IS NOTED THAT THE INCOME AFTER CLAIMING EXPENSES THE INCOME HAS BEEN SHARED WITH AD. CLUB AND CONSEQUENTLY PAYMENT OF RS. 112 CRORES HAS BEEN MADE. ALSO AS EVIDENT FROM THE 6 ITA NO. 2072/MUM/2016 PREVIOUS YEAR'S FIGURE GIVEN IN INCOME & EXPENDITURE A/C THE APPELLANT IS ORGANIZING THIS PEST EVERY YEAR, FROM WHICH HUGE INCOME IS GENERATED. THUS, EVERY YEAR HUGE PROFIT IS BEING GENERATED AND HENCE THE ACTIVITY CANNOT BE SAID TO BE WITHOUT PROFIT MOTIVE. FROM THESE FACTS IT IS CLEAR THAT 'THIS ACTIVITY OF THE APPELLANT INVOLVES CARRYING ON OF ANY ACTIVITY IN THE NATURE OF TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS AND ALSO THE ACTIVITY OF: RENDERING ANY SERVICE IN RELATION TO ANY TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS FOR CESS OR FEE AS PROVIDED IN PROVISO TO SECTION 2(15). III. THE APPELLANT HAS RELIED UPON CIRCULAR NO. 11 ISSUED BY CBDT AND HAS ONLY PARTLY REPRODUCED THE SAME. HOWEVER, IN THE CIRCULAR ITSELF IT IS MENTIONED THAT: 3.2. IN THE FINAL ANALYSIS, HOWEVER, WHETHER THE ASSESSEE HAS FOR ITS OBJECT: THE ADVANCEMENT OF ANY OTHER OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY IS A QUESTION OF FACT. IF SUCH ASSESSES IS ENGAGED IN ANY ACTIVITY IN THE NATURE OF TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS OR RENDERS ANY SERVICE/N RELATION TO TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS, IT WOULD NOT BE ENTITLED TO CLAIM THAT ITS OBJECT IS CHARITABLE PURPOSE. IN SUCH A CASE THE OBJECT OF 'GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY' WILL BE ONLY A MASK OR 7 ITA NO. 2072/MUM/2016 DEVICE TO HIDE THE TRUE PURPOSE WHICH IS TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS OR THE RENDERING OF ANY SERVICE IN RELATION TO TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS. IN THIS REGARD, IT MAY BE NOTED THAT THE APPELLANT IS NOT DISPUTING THAT ITS OBJECT IS NOT FALLING UNDER 'THE ADVANCEMENT OF ANY OTHER OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY'. FROM THE DISCUSSION IN PRECEDING PARA IT IS CLEAR THAT THE APPELLANT IS RENDERING SERVICES IN RELATION TO TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS. THEREFORE, AS MENTIONED IN THE CIRCULAR NO. 11 QUOTED ABOVE, THE APPELLANT WOULD NOT BE ENTITLED TO CLAIM THAT ITS OBJECT IS 'CHARITABLE PURPOSE'. AGGRIEVED, NOW ASSESSEE IS IN SECOND APPEAL BEFORE TRIBUNAL. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND GONE THR OUGH THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE OBJECT CLAUSES AND NOTED THAT NONE OF THE OBJECTS ARE IN ANY WAY I N THE NATURE OF CARRYING ON ANY TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS OR REND ERING ANY SERVICE THERETO. DURING THE COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE TR IBUNAL, IT WAS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT ASSESSEE BEING A TRADE ASSOCIA TION OF ADVERTISING AGENCIES IS NOT IN ANY WAY CARRYING ON ANY ACTIVITY IN THE NATURE OF TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS NOR ANY ACTIVITY OF RENDERING ANY SERVICE IN RELATION TO ANY TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS FOR A CESS OR A FEE OR ANY OTHER CONSIDERATION. WE FIND FROM THE FACTS OF THE CASE T HAT ASSESSING OFFICER HAS HELD THE INTEREST AMOUNT OF RS. 30,62,564/- AS TAXABLE ON THE PREMISE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS HIT BY THE FIRST PROVISO TO SE CTION 2(15) I.E. TO SAY 8 ITA NO. 2072/MUM/2016 RENDERING ANY SERVICE IN RELATION THERETO. THE ONLY REASON CONTAINED IN PARAS 1 TO 9 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS THAT, IF THE ASSESSEE IS NOT A MUTUAL BENEFIT SOCIETY ..TO BE CARRYING ON CHARITABLE PUR POSE, BY VIRTUE OF THE NEWLY INSERTED PROVISO. REGARDING GOA FEST, IT WAS CLAIMED THAT IN FURTHERANCE OF THE OBJECTS OF THIS TRADE ASSOCIATIO N, ONLY ONCE A YEAR THE ASSESSEE HOLDS A FEST IN GOA AND INVITES EMINENT SP EAKERS FROM THE INTERNATIONAL ADVERTISING WORLD AS WELL AS THE MEDI A WITH WHICH THE MEMBERS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE INEXTRICABLY LINKED. TH US EVEN BY THE REMOTEST INTERPRETATION, NO PART OF THIS ACTIVITY, CAN BE HELD TO BE IN NATURE OF TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS OR RENDERING ANY SER VICE IN RELATION THERETO. THE ENTIRE GOA FEST IS WHOLLY AND ONLY IN FURTHER ONCE OF THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSOCIATION ITSELF ONLY. IN SUPPORT OF THIS, STRONGEST RELIANCE IS PLACED ON THE SPEECH OF THE HONBLE FINANCE MINI STER ON THE FLOOR OF THE HOUSE OF PARLIAMENT WHEN THIS AMENDMENT WAS INT RODUCED. REFERENCE IS ALSO DRAWN TO MEMORANDUM EXPLAINING TH E PROVISIONS OF THE FINANCE BILL, 2008. ONE HAS TO KEEP IN MIND THAT TH E ASSESSEE IS NOT IN ANY WAY CARRYING ON ANY BUSINESS ACTIVITY AND THE G OA FEST CANNOT IN ANY WHICH WAY BE STRETCHED TO MEAN THAT THE ASSESSEE IS CARRYING ANY BUSINESS ACTIVITY MERELY BECAUSE THERE HAS BEEN A S URPLUS. THE INTENTION OF COLLECTING SUBSCRIPTION IS NOT TO MAKE A SURPLUS BUT THE SAME IS TO COST OF CONDUCTING THE FEST. THE SURPLUS HAS ARISEN DUE TO AN UNPRECEDENTED RESPONSE INCLUDING LAST MINUTE ENTRIES. FURTHER CIR CULAR 11/2008 DATED 19 DECEMBER 2008 ALSO SAYS THAT THE INSERTION OF THE P ROVISO TO SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT IS TO CURB THE ACTIVITY OF ASSESSE E WHO CARRY ON TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS UNDER A MASK OR A DEVICE OF CH ARITABLE PURPOSE, WHICH IS CLEARLY NOT SO IN THIS CASE. 9 ITA NO. 2072/MUM/2016 5. WE FIND THAT IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE NOT A SINGL E TRANSACTION IS IN NATURE OF TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS AND THE GOA F EST FROM THE DETAILED FACTS ENUMERATED ABOVE IS ABUNDANTLY AND C LEARLY & WHOLLY TOWARDS THE ADVANCEMENT OF ITS OBJECTS WHICH HAVE B EEN DULY CONSIDERED AS BEING TOWARDS ADVANCEMENT OF OBJECT GENERAL PUBL IC UTILITY, WHILE GRANTING REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT THE SURPLUS GENERATED OUT OF THE 'GO A FEST' ACTIVITIES IS FURTHER ACCUMULATED OR SET APART FOR FUTURE APPLICA TION IS CHARITABLE PURPOSE IN INDIA. FURTHERMORE, THE INCOME SO ACCUMU LATED OR SET APART WERE INVESTED AS PER MODES/ FORMS SPECIFIED IN SECT ION 11(5) OF THE ACT I.E. DEPOSITED IN BANK OF MAHARASHTRA IN THE FORM O F FIXED DEPOSITS AND SAVING ACCOUNT. NO AMOUNT OF THE SURPLUS, IN ANY MA NNER, WAS DISTRIBUTED OR UTILIZED FOR ANY ACTIVITY OTHER THAN THE ACTIVIT IES SPECIFIED WITHIN THE CHARTER OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE 'GOA FEST 2010' EVENT FALLS WITHIN TH E AMBIT OF SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT AND SINCE, THE ASSESSEE HAS COMPLIED WIT H THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 11 OF THE ACT, IT SHOULD BE ALLOWED EXEMPTI ON WITH RESPECT TO SURPLUS INCOME EARNED FROM CONDUCTING THE EVENT. AS SESSEE ALSO RELIED UPON SEVERAL CASE LAWS 6. THE ONE OF THE CASE LAW CITED BY LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE IS APT FOR CITATION HERE AND THAT IS THE DECISION OF HONB LE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT (EXEMPTION) VS THE FERTLISERS ASSOCIATI ON OF INDIA IN ITA NO.964 AND 966 OF DELHI/2017 DATED 113.11.2017, WHE REIN, EXACTLY ON IDENTICAL FACTS, HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT RELYING O N VARIOUS CASE LAWS ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION.11 CON SIDERING THE PROVISO OF SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT. HONBLE DELHI HIGH CO URT OBSERVED AS UNDER: 10 ITA NO. 2072/MUM/2016 THE ASSESSEE ASSOCIATION IS A NON-PROFIT AND NON-TR ADING COMPANY REPRESENTING THE INTERESTS OF FERTILIZER MANUFACTUR ERS, DISTRIBUTORS, IMPORTERS, EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURERS, RESEARCH INSTIT UTES AND SUPPLIERS OF INPUTS, REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 25 OF ME COMPANIES ACT, 1956. IN SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT FOR AY 2010-11, THE AO WAS OF T HE OPINION THAT THE EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 2(15) OF HE ACT BY VIRTUE O F THE AMENDMENT OF 2009 I E THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS ENGAGED IN THE ADVA NCEMENT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY, DISENTITLED IT TO CLAIM EXEMPTION M LAX FROM PAYMENT OF TAX ONE OF THE MAIN GROUNDS WHICH INFLUENCED THE AO TO HOLD AS IT DID, WERE THE SUMS OF MONEY RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOU NT OF REGISTRATION CHARGES, ETC., FOR SEMINARS/WORKSHOPS HELD TO INFOR M ITS MEMBERS. 3 THE AO'S ORDER WAS AFFIRMED BY THE CIT(A); THE AS SESSES THEREFORE APPROACHED (HE ITAT. BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THE ITA T UPHELD THE ASSESSEE'S CONTENTION AFTER NOTICING THE AMENDMENTS LO THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 MADE IN 20.09. THE ITAT ALSO TOOK NOTE ON SEVERAL DECISIONS SUCH AS COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX V. SAT PUBLICATION FUND ( 2002) 258 ITR 70 (SC), ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V. SWAT ART SILK CLOTH MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION (1980) 121 ITR 1 (SC) AND MORE IMPORTANTLY THE RECENT DECISION OF THIS COURT IN INDIA TRADE PROMOTION ORGANIZATION V. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) & OT HERS 371 ITR 333. 4.. THE TRIBUNAL HELD AS FOLLOWS - '7.7 WE ALSO AGREE WITH THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE LD COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSES THAT MERE CHARGING OF FEE FRONT MEMBERS OR NON-MEMBERS FOR RENDERING SERVICES LIKE TRAINING, CONDUCTING SEMIN ARS WOULD NOT IPSO FACTO LEAD TO DENIAL OF EXEMPTION. THE DOMINANT OBJECT OF THE ASSESSES REMAINS CHARITABLE AND THE AFORESAID ACTIVITIES ARE ONLY INCIDENTAL TO THE MAIN ACTIVITY OF THE ASSESSES. ALSO, THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE ARE BENEFITING THE PUBLIC AT LARGE AT SUBMITTED BY THE ID. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. FURTHERMORE, IT IS NOT THE CASE OF THE DEPARTMENT THAT ANY CHANGE IN OBJECT HAD TAKEN PLACE IN THE RELEVANT YEAR SO AS TO TAKE THAT ASSESSE OUTSIDE THE AMBIT OF SECTION 2(75]. THE EFFECT OF THE AMENDMENT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED ELABORATELY BY THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN ITPO CASE (SUPRA) AS WELL AS THE JUDGMENT OF APEX COURT IN ANDHRA PRADESH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE (SUPRA) AND THE TEST OF DOMINAN T OBJECT HAS NOT BEEN ALTERED EVEN AFTER THE SAID AMENDMENT. WE THER EFORE, HOLD (HAT THE DENIAL OF EXEMPT/ON UNDER SECTION 11 AND 12 IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND ACCORDINGLY THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO AND CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A) ARE DELETED.' 5. HAVING REGARD TO THE ENTIRETY OF CIRCUMSTANCES E SPECIALLY THAT THE ITAT TOOK NOTE OF THE RELEVANT DECISIONS SUCH AS SURAT A RT SILK CLOTH 11 ITA NO. 2072/MUM/2016 MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION (SUPRA), CIT VS. ANDHRA C HAMBER OF COMMERCE55 ITR 722 AND INDIA TRADE PROMOTION ORGAN IZATION (SUPRA), THE RATIO OF WHICH WERE CORRECTLY APPLIED, THIS COURT IS OF THE OPINION THAT NO SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW ARISES. 7. FROM THE ABOVE DECISION OF HONBLE DELHI HIGH CO URT AND THE FATS OF THE PRESENT CASE AND DISCUSSION CARRIED OUT ABOV E REGARDING FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE RECEI PTS REGARDING GOA FEST 2010 AND INTEREST RECEIVED ON MONEY DEPOSITED IS EX EMPT UNDER SECTION.11 OF THE ACT. THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUT HORITIES ARE SET ASIDE AND APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1.03-2019 . SD/- SD/- ( / RAJESH KUMAR) ( /MAHAVIR SINGH) ( / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ( / JUDICIAL MEMBER) , / / MUMBAI, DATED: 01-03-2018 , . / SUDIP SARKAR, SR.P/SBKP 12 ITA NO. 2072/MUM/2016 ! '#$% &%'# / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. #$ / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 1' ( ) / THE CIT(A) 4. 1' / CIT 5. 456 #'78 , ( 78 , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 69: / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, $4' #' //TRUE COPY// / ( ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI