ITO, New Delhi V. Consultancy Development Centre, New Delhi

ITA 2173/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6566 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 10 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-02-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 21-09-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 12-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 143(3); 12A; 12

Judgement Text

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH B : NEW DELHI BEFORE MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I TA NO . 2173/DEL/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009 - 10 ) ITO(E) TRUST WARD - III, ROOM NO.2419, 24 TH FLOOR, E - 2, BLOCK, PRATYAKSH KAR BHAWAN, CIVI CENTRE, JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU MARG, NEW DELHI - 110002 VS. CONSULTANCY DEVELOPMENT CENTRE, IIND FLOOR, ZONE IVB, LODHI ROAD, INDIA HABITAT CENTRE, NEW DELHI PAN:AAATC4020A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SH. ANIL KUMAR SHARMA, SR. DR REVENUE BY: SH. SD KAPILA, ADV SH. RR MAURYA, ADV SH. SANJAY KUMAR, ADV DATE OF HEARING 21/12/ 201 6 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 16 / 02 / 2017 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI , A . M . 1. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A) - XXI, NEW DELHI DATED 24.01.2013 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: - 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN LAW, THE LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE ARE CHARITABLE IN NATURE AND NOT IN THE NATURE OF TRADE, BUSINESS OR COMMERCE SPECIALLY WHEN THE ASSESSEE IS CHARGING FEE AS EV ENT MANAGER FROM THE PARTICIPANTS FOR ATTENDING THE SEMINAR AND EVENTS AND ALSO OTHER PROGRAM AND ACTIVITIES. 2. ON THE FACT AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN APPLYING THE RATION OF JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT I N THE CASE OF THE BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS AND ALLOWING THE RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE ARE CHARITABLE IN NATURE WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT. 3. THE ASSESSEE IS A TRUST REGISTERED U/S 12A OF THE A CT ENGAGED IN THE ACTIVITY RELATING TO AWARENESS, PROGRAMS IN CONSULTANCY FIELD. IT FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 30.09.2009 SHOWING NIL INCOME. THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS CARRYING ON ACTIV ITIES BY CHARGING FEES ETC AND THEREFORE, THEY ARE PURELY COMMERCIAL IN NATURE. HE FURTHER HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NEITHER IN THE FIELD OF EDUCATION PAGE 2 OF 3 NOR IN THE FIELD MEDICAL RELIEF OR RELIEF OF POOR. THEREBY, IT WAS HELD THAT AMENDED DEFINITION W.E.F AY 2008 - 09 THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION U/S 11, 12 AND 13 AND INCOME WAS ASSESSED AT RS. 17269764/ - . THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD CIT(A) WHO ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE HOLDING THAT THE ISSUE IS SQUARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN CASE OF BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS 2012 - TIOL - 928 - HON'BLE HIGH COURT - DEL - IT. HE FURTHER HELD THAT THERE IS NO PROFIT MOTIVE INVOLVED AND THEREFORE THE ASSESSEE IS A GENUINE CHARITABLE O RGANIZATION WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 2 (15) OF THE ACT. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) THE REVENUE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. THE LD DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER WHEREAS THE LD AR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A ) AND FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE IS FURTHER COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN 360 ITR 138 AND 358 ITR 78. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED A CHART OF COMPARABLE OF THOSE DECISIONS WITH THE FACTS INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT CASE. 5. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND ALSO PERUSED THE ORDER OF LOWER AUTHORITIES. THE LD DR COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE FACT THAT THE ISSUE IS NOT COVERED BY THE DECISION OF HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN CASE OF BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS REPORTED AT 358 ITR 78 AS WELL AS THE CIRCULAR OF THE CBDT NO. 11/2008. THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN GS1 INDIA VS. DGIT 360 ITR 138 HAS ALSO EXPLAINED THE FACT OF AMENDMENT W.E.F. 01.04.2009 WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT THE AMENDED PROVISIO NS APPLIES ONLY IN THE CASE WHERE THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE FALLS IN THE CATEGORY OF OBJECTS OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY. IN THE PRESENT CASE THE ASSESSEE IS CARRYING ON EDUCATION AND TRAINING PROGRAMME FOR THE PURPOSES OF FOR CONSULTANCY DEVELOPMENT PROFESSION IN THE AREA SPECIFIED BY DEPARTMENT OF SCIENTIFIC AND INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH UNDER THE MINISTRY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY. THEREFORE, THE ACTIVITY OF THE ASSESSEE IS FALLING UNDER THE DEFINITION OF EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES TO WHICH THE AMENDED PROVIS IONS DO NOT APPLY. EVEN OTHERWISE CHARGING A NOMINAL FEES FOR THE USE OF THE APPELLANT SOCIETIES FACILITIES. IT DOES NOT REFLECT BUSINESS ATTITUDE NOR INDICATE PROFIT ORIENTED INTENT. IN VIEW OF THIS WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT( A) AND HENCE, DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. PAGE 3 OF 3 6. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 6 / 02 / 2017 . - S D / - - S D / - ( SUCHITRA KAMBLE ) (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 1 6 / 02 / 2017 A K KEOT COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPLICANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI