Process-Cum-Product Development Centre, Meerut V. ACIT, Meerut

ITA 3401/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3828 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-02-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 29-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S S RANA; MUNSHI RAM BIHAGRA
• Assessee Lawyers: K K GARG
• Keywords: Charitable institution
• Section: 11; 12A; 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCHES (CAMP AT MEERUT) BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.3401/DEL./2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11) ITA NO.3402/DEL./2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12) ITA NO.3403/DEL./2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14) PROCESS-CUM-PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT CENTRE, VS. ADDL. C IT, SPORT GOODS COMPLEX, CIRCLE 2, DELHI ROAD, MEERUT. MEERUT. (PAN : AAAJP1090M) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI K.K. GARG, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : SHRI S.S. RANA, CIT DR SHRI MUNSHI RAM BIHAGRA, SENIOR DR DATE OF HEARING : 09.01.2019 DATE OF ORDER : 04.02.2019 O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : SINCE COMMON QUESTIONS OF FACTS AND LAW HAVE BEEN R AISED IN THE AFORESAID APPEALS, THE SAME ARE BEING DISPOS ED OFF BY WAY OF CONSOLIDATED ORDER TO AVOID REPETITION OF DISCUSSIO N. ITA NO.3401, 3402 & 3403/DEL./2017 2 2. THE APPELLANT, PROCESS-CUM-PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT C ENTRE (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ASSESSEE) BY FILI NG THE PRESENT APPEALS, SOUGHT TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER ALL DATED 06.03.2017 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT (APPEALS), ALIGARH QUA THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14 ON THE IDENTICAL GROUNDS INTER ALIA THAT :- 1. THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX( APPEA LS) ERRED IN OBSERVING THAT THE APPELLANT EDUCATIONAL I NSTITUTION IS NOT EXISTING SOLELY FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES AND TH US, DISMISSING THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C)(IIIAB) OF THE IN COME-TAX ACT. THE OBSERVATION IS UNWARRANTED AND AGAINST FAC TS OF THE CASE. 2. THAT THE APPELLANT INSTITUTION IS SOLELY ENGAGED IN IMPARTING EDUCATION AND IN THE SAME PROCESS TRAIN S TUDENTS BY SENDING THEM TO SPORTS INDUSTRIES ETC. THAT THE LD COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) IS ADMITTED THIS FACTS, THAT THE SOCIETY IS ENGAGED IN EDUCATION/TRAINING GIVEN TO THE YOUNG IN PREPARATION OF WORK IN LIFE AND ITS ACTIVITIES WERE WITHOUT ANY PROFIT MOTIVE. AFTER THAT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX APPEALS IS N OT JUSTIFIED TO ALLOW THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 10(23C)(IIIA B) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. 3. THAT THE LD COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX (APPEALS ) IS ARBITRARY AND UNJUST, FOR NOT CONSIDERING THIS FACT S, THAT THE SOCIETY IS SUBSTANTIALLY FINANCED B THE GOVERNMENT AND FUNCTIONING UNDER THE ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL OF MIC RO SMALL AND MEDIUM ENTERPRISES(MSME), GOVERNMENT OF INDIA. 4. THAT THE APPELLANT HAS CLAIMED EXEMPTION OF ITS INCOME U/S 1O(23C)(IIIAB) IRRESPECTIVE OF PROVISIONS CONTA INED IN SECTION 12AA OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, THE REJECTION O F THE SAME IS BED IN LAW. ITA NO.3401, 3402 & 3403/DEL./2017 3 3. BRIEFLY STATED THE IDENTICAL FACTS NECESSARY FOR ADJUDICATION OF ALL THE AFORESAID THREE APPEALS OF ASSESSEE PERT AINING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14 ARE : A SSESSEE SOCIETY IS ENGAGED IN CONDUCTING VARIOUS SHORT DURA TION TRAINING PROGRAMS OF COMPUTER TRAINING, DONER, CAD/CAM/D.L.G . TECH, DST, MECH. WEB DESIGNING, AUDIT CAD, LINUS & C++, T RAINING IN COMPUTER ACCOUNTING SYSTEM (TCAS), TALLY 9, LEG GUA RDS & GLOVES (STST) HAND GLOVES MANUFACTURING, SHUTTLE CO CK MANUFACTURING, CRICKET BAT MANUFACTURING, CAROM BOA RD MANUFACTURING, LEG GUARD MANUFACTURING, BATTING GLO VES MANUFACTURING, FOOTBALL MANUFACTURING, CRICKET BALL MANUFACTURING (JALANDHAR) AND LEATHER WORKSHOP, TRAINING IN R/P W ORKSHOP, WOOD WORK SHOP ETC.. ASSESSEE SOCIETY CLAIMED EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 10(23C)(IIIB) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHOR T THE ACT). DECLINING THE EXPLANATION FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY TO PROVE ITS ELIGIBILITY FOR CLAIMING EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 10(23C)(IIIAB), ASSESSING OFFICER PROCEEDED TO DISA LLOW THE EXEMPTION ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY I S NOT RUNNING AN INSTITUTION TO PROVIDE SYSTEMATIC EDUCATION BY RELY ING UPON THE DECISION RENDERED BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN T HE CASE CITED AS SOLO TRUSTEE LOKA SHIKSHAK TRUST VS. CIT 101 ITR 234 AND THEREBY ASSESSED THE NET TAXABLE INCOME AT RS.56,48 ,582/-, (-) ITA NO.3401, 3402 & 3403/DEL./2017 4 RS.18,23,401/- AND (-) RS.5,48,829/- FOR AYS 2010-1 1, 2011-12 AND 2013-14 RESPECTIVELY. 4. ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BY WAY OF AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) WHO HAS DISMISSED THE APPEALS. F EELING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE HAS COME UP IN APPEALS BEFO RE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PARTIES TO THE APPEAL, GONE THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS R ELIED UPON AND ORDERS PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES BELOW IN T HE LIGHT OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 6. SHORT QUESTION TO BE DECIDED IN ALL THE AFORESAI D APPEALS IS AS TO WHETHER ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS ELIGIBLE FOR CLAIMIN G EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 10(23C)(IIIB). AO AS WELL AS LD. CIT (A) HAVE DECLINED THE EXEMPTION TO THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY ON T HE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY DOES NOT EXIST SOLELY FOR EDUC ATIONAL PURPOSES. 7. UNDISPUTEDLY, THE AFFAIRS OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIET Y ARE MANAGED, ADMINISTERED, DIRECTED AND CONTROLLED BY T HE GOVERNING COUNCIL ON ORDERS / DIRECTIVES RECEIVED FROM GOVERN MENT OF INDIA THROUGH GOVERNMENT COUNCIL. IT IS ALSO NOT IN DISP UTE THAT THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY ARE AUDITED BY COM PTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL OF INDIA (CAG). IT IS ALSO NOT IN D ISPUTE THAT ASSESSEE SOCIETY GETS RAW MATERIAL FROM INDUSTRIES AND AFTER MANUFACTURING THE GOODS THROUGH ITS TRAINEE RETURNS THE FINISHED ITA NO.3401, 3402 & 3403/DEL./2017 5 GOODS AFTER RECEIVING ITS JOB CHARGES. IT IS ALSO NOT IN DISPUTE THAT AS PER MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION, ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS MANAGED/RUN BY MINISTRY OF SMALL SCALE INDUSTRIES, MINISTRY OF INDUSTRY, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT THRO UGH ITS GOVERNING COUNCIL AND THE ELEMENT OF PROFIT MAKING IS NOT THERE. 8. BEFORE PROCEEDING FURTHER, IT IS IMPERATIVE TO E XAMINE THE AIMS AND OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WHICH ARE EXTRACTED FOR READY PERUSAL AS UNDER :- III. THE MAIN OBJECTIVES FOR WHICH THE SOCIETY IS ESTABLISHED ARE: 1. TO DEVELOP NEW TECHNOLOGIES AND UPGRADE THE EXISTING LEVEL OF TECHNOLOGY OF SPORTS GOODS AND LE ISURE TIME EQUIPMENT. 2. TO DEVELOP NEW PRODUCTS/DESIGN OF SPORTS GOODS AND LEISURE TIME EQUIPMENTS 3. TO IDENTIFY EXPORT-WORTHY SPORTS GOODS PRODUCT AND LEISURE TIME EQUIPMENTS, DEVELOP AND ESTABLISH TECHNOLOGIES FOR THEIR MANUFACTURE. 4. TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF THESE PRODUCTS THROUGH QUALITY CONTROL AND STANDARDIZATION TO MEET NATIONA L AND INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS AND ALSO MAKE THIS INDU STRY COMPETITIVE. 5. TO IMPART TRAINING TO CRAFTSMEN AND SUPERVISORS FROM THE INDUSTRY IN THE FIELD OF MANUFACTURE AND DEVELOPMENT OF SPORTS GOODS. ITA NO.3401, 3402 & 3403/DEL./2017 6 6. TO COLLECT, COLLATE AND DISSEMINATE TECHNICAL INFORMATION AND KNOW-HOW TO THE USER INDUSTRY BY PROVIDING DOCUMENTATION SERVICES AND COORDINATE WIT H RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTIONS. 7. TO RENDER TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES THROUGH THE CENTRE'S COMMON FACILITY WORK-SHOP/LABORATORIES IN THE ABOVE AREAS. 8. TO CONDUCT MARKET RESEARCH AND IDENTIFY PRODUCT S FOR DOMESTIC AND EXPORT MARKETS. 9. THE CONJOINT READING OF THE MAIN OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY GOES TO PROVE THAT IT IS ENGAGED IN MULTIFA RIOUS ACTIVITIES RELATED TO EDUCATION AND TRAINING FOR PRODUCTION OF SPORTS GOODS AND LEISURE TIME EQUIPMENTS. 10. PERUSAL OF THE AUDITED INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31.03.2018 AVAILABLE AT PAGE 4 OF T HE PAPER BOOK, FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31.03.2009 AVAILABLE AT PAGE 20 OF THE PAPER BOOK, FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31.03.2010 AVAILABLE AT P AGE 39 OF THE PAPER BOOK, FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31.03.2011 AVAILABL E AT PAGE 56 OF THE PAPER BOOK, FOR THE YEAR ENDING 3103.2012 AVAIL ABLE AT PAGE 73 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31.03.201 3 AVAILABLE AT PAGE 92 OF THE PAPER BOOK, GO TO PROVE THAT THE SUB STANTIVE INCOME / RECEIPT OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS FROM TRAINING COURSES BEING IMPARTED TO THE STUDENTS. ITA NO.3401, 3402 & 3403/DEL./2017 7 11. LD. CIT(A) PROCEEDED TO DECLINE THE EXEMPTION U NDER SECTION 10(23C)(IIIAB) TO THE ASSESSEE ON THE SOLE GROUND THAT ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS RUNNING PROCESS-CUM-PRODUCT DEV ELOPMENT CENTRE AND INVOLVED IN MULTIFARIOUS ACTIVITIES AND ALL THE ACTIVITIES CANNOT BE CONSIDERED TO BE EDUCATIONAL IN NATURE. 12. UNDER SECTION 10(23C)(IIIAB), ANY INCOME RECEIV ED BY A PERSON ON BEHALF OF ANY UNIVERSITY OR ANY EDUCATION AL INSTITUTION EXISTING SOLELY FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES AND NOT FO R PURPOSES OF PROFIT AND WHICH IS WHOLLY OR SUBSTANTIALLY FINANCE D BY THE GOVERNMENT, IS ENTITLED FOR EXEMPTION. 13. AO RELIED UPON THE DECISION RENDERED BY HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF SOLO TRUSTEE LOKA SHIKSHAK TRUST (SUPRA) WHEREIN THE WORD EDUCATION AS REFERRED IN SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT IS EXPLAINED AS UNDER :- THE WORD EDUCATION IN SECTION 2(15) OF THE INCOM E- TAX ACT, 1961, CONNOTES THE PROCESS OF TRAINING AND DEVELOPING THE KNOWLEDGE, SKILL, MIND AND CHARACTER OF STUDENTS BY NORMAL SCHOOLING, AND HAS NOT BEEN USED IN THE WIDE AND EXTENSIVE SENSE ACCORDING TO WHICH EVE RY ACQUISITION OF FURTHER KNOWLEDGE CONSTITUTES EDUCATION. 14. NOW, WE ARE TO EXAMINE MAIN OBJECTS OF THE ASSE SSEE SOCIETY WHETHER IMPARTING TRAINING BY IT, FALLS WITHIN THE DEFINITION OF EDUCATION. HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF SOLO TRUSTEE ITA NO.3401, 3402 & 3403/DEL./2017 8 LOKA SHIKSHAK TRUST (SUPRA) HAS CATEGORICALLY HELD THAT EDUCATION CONNOTES PROCESS OF TRAINING AND DEVELO PING THE KNOWLEDGE, SKILL, MIND AND CHARACTER OF STUDENTS BY NORMAL SCHOOLING. 15. THOUGH THE MAIN OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY ARE DIVIDED INTO 8 OBJECTS BUT ALL ARE INTERCONNECTED WITH EACH OTHER SO AS TO IMPART THE BEST AVAILABLE TRAININGS TO THE STUDENTS TO DEVELOP NEW PRODUCTS / BUSINESS OF SPORT GOODS AND LEISURE TIME EQUIPMENTS. WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT WHEN THE TRAININ G IMPARTED TO THE STUDENTS IS NOT TO PRODUCE GOODS OF WORLD STAND ARD BY MAKING NECESSARY MARKETING RESEARCH AND BY IDENTIFYING PRO DUCTS FOR DOMESTIC AND EXPORT MARKET, SUCH TRAINING WOULD BE OF NO USE AND THE STUDENTS WHO HAVE BEEN GIVEN TRAINING WOULD NOT BE IN A POSITION TO GET PLACEMENT IN THE SPORT GOODS AND LE ISURE TIME EQUIPMENTS INDUSTRY. MOREOVER THE ENTIRE EMPHASIS I S LAID BY OUR GOVERNMENT ON SKILL DEVELOPMENT BY DEPARTING FROM AGE OLD SYSTEM OF IMPARTING ACADEMIC EDUCATION AND TRAINING NOT AS PER REQUIREMENT OF THE INDUSTRY. 16. FURTHERMORE, WHEN WE EXAMINE THE AUDITED INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IT SHOW S THAT SUBSTANTIAL INCOME IS FROM TRAINING COURSES AND THE RE IS A MINISCULE INCOME FROM JOB RECEIPTS. WHEN THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS ADMITTEDLY ITA NO.3401, 3402 & 3403/DEL./2017 9 GETTING RAW MATERIAL FROM THE VARIOUS INDUSTRIES TO PRODUCE THE SPORT GOODS FOR THEM AND THE JOB CHARGES PAID BY TH EM ARE AGAIN USED FOR RUNNING THE TRAINING INSTITUTE IT CAN NOT BE SAID BY ANY STRETCH OF IMAGINATION THAT ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS NOT BEING RUN FOR EDUCATION / TRAINING PURPOSE. PARTICULARLY, THERE I S NO CASE OF THE REVENUE THAT THE MAIN OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIE TY IS PROFIT MAKING RATHER DECLINING THE EXEMPTION ON THE SOLE G ROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE INSTITUTION IS NOT EXISTING SOLELY FOR EDU CATIONAL PURPOSES. SO, WE ARE CONSTRAINED TO RECORD THAT THE WORD EDU CATION IS TO BE GIVEN WIDE INTERPRETATION WHICH INCLUDES TRAINING A ND DEVELOPING THE KNOWLEDGE, SKILL, MIND AND CHARACTER OF THE STU DENTS BY NORMAL SCHOOLING. 17. SO, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS ENGAGED IN IMPARTING TRAINING TO THE STUDENTS IN MA NUFACTURING THE SPORT GOODS AND LEISURE EQUIPMENTS WITHOUT ANY PROF IT MOTIVE. 18. LD. CIT(A) PROCEEDED TO RECORD IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT THE ISSUE OF CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY BEING OF CHARITABLE NATURE IS NOT RELEVANT IN THIS CASE AS A SSESSEE SOCIETY IS YET TO BE REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT. HOWEVER, IN THE FACE OF THE ADMITTED FACT THAT THE COORDINATE B ENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE VIDE ORDER DATED 13 .02.2017 AND 13.04.2018 VIDE ITA NO.410/DEL/2012 AND 3837/DEL/20 13 ITA NO.3401, 3402 & 3403/DEL./2017 10 RESPECTFULLY REMANDED THE CASE BACK TO CIT (A) TO R ECONSIDER THE GROUND OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA BY RELYIN G UPON THE DECISION RENDERED BY THE HONBLE ORISSA HIGH COURT IN CASE OF ORISSA TRUST OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING VS . CIT 24 TAXMANN.COM 202 (2012) (ORISSA), WHEREIN THE TRUST ENGAGED IN THE IDENTICAL ACTIVITIES HAS BEEN GRANTED REGISTRAT ION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT. COORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN CASE CITED AS CENTRAL INSTITUTE OF TOOL DESIGN VS. DIT (E) IN ITA NO.1563/HYD/2014 VIDE ORDER DATED 08.07.2015 ALSO DIRECTED THE DIT (E) TO RECONSIDER THE GROUND OF REGISTRATION UN DER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT TO CENTRAL INSTITUTE OF DELHI DESIG N ENGAGED IN IMPARTING TRAINING FACILITIES TO TECHNICAL PERSONNE L IN DESIGNING AND IN MAKING TOOLS, DIES AND MOULDS, WHICH ACTIVITIES ARE IDENTICAL TO THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY. SO WHEN THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL HAD ALREADY DIRECTED THE CIT (E) TO RECONSIDER THE GRANT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT IN THE L IGHT OF THE NUMEROUS DECISIONS REFERRED AT PAGE 6 OF THE ORDER PASSED IN ITA NO.410/DEL/2012, THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR EXEM PTION U/S 10(23C)(IIIAB) CANNOT BE REJECTED. MORESO EXEMPTION SOUGHT FOR BY ASSESSEE SOCIETY U/S 10(23C) (IIIAB) IS INDEPENDENT OF EXEMPTION BEING SOUGHT FOR BY THE ASSESSEE U/S 12AA OF THE AC T. SO ITA NO.3401, 3402 & 3403/DEL./2017 11 EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C) (IIIAB) CAN NOT BE DECLINED O N THE GROUND THAT REGISTRATION U/S 12A HAS BEEN REJECTED. 19. HONBLE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD IN CASE OF CITY MONTESSORI SCHOOL VS. UOI (2009) 315 ITR 48 (ALL.) DECIDED THE IDENTICAL ISSUE DEFINING THE WORD SYSTEMATIC RESEARCH BASED EDUCATION AND TRAINING AS UNDER :- THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ONLY PROVIDING TRADITIONAL EDUCATION, BUT WAS ALSO PREPARING STUDENTS BY PROVI DING GUIDELINES TO GET ADMISSIONS IN THE PROFESSIONAL INSTITUTIONS TO PURSUE THEIR HIGHER STUDIES. THE SE NSE, IN WHICH THE WORD 'EDUCATION' HAS BEEN USED IN SECTION 2(15), IS THE SYSTEMATIC INSTRUCTION, SCHOOLING OR TRAINING GIVEN TO THE YOUNG IN PREPARATION FOR THE WORK OF LIFE. SIMILARLY, EXTENDING FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE/SCHOLARSHIP, ETC., TO THE STUDENTS FOR T HEIR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSE WOULD SQUARELY FALL WITHIN THE CONNOTATION OF 'EDUCATION I AS PER THE RATIO LAID D OWN IN THE CASE OF CIT V. SARASWATH POOR STUDENTS FUND [1984] 150 ITR 142, 147 / [1985] 20 TAXMAN 211 (KAR .). THUS, THE ASSESSEE WAS ENGAGED IN EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES WHICH FELL UNDER CHARITABLE PURPOSE. 20. IN VIEW OF WHAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED ABOVE, WE AR E OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY, SUBSTANT IALLY FINANCED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, IS ENGAGED ONLY IN IMPARTI NG RESEARCH BASED EDUCATION/ SKILL TRAINING TO THE STUDENTS IN MANUFACTURING OF SPORTS GOODS AND LEISURE EQUIPMENTS WITHOUT ANY PRO FIT MOTIVE, TO ITA NO.3401, 3402 & 3403/DEL./2017 12 ENABLE THEM TO GET PLACEMENT FALLS WITHIN THE DEFIN ITION OF EDUCATION U/S 2(15) OF THE ACT, HENCE ENTITLED FOR EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 10(23C)(IIIAB) OF THE ACT. CONSEQUENTLY, A LL THE THREE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 4 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019. SD/- SD/- (N.S. SAINI) (KULDIP SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED THE 4 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY , 2019 TS COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT(A), MEERUT. 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.