Delhi High Court - Orders
Commissioner Of Income Tax ... vs Indian Broadcasting Foundation on 5 August, 2024
Author: Yashwant Varma
Bench: Yashwant Varma
$~16 & 17
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ ITA 469/2023
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS)
.....Appellant
Through: Mr. Abhishek Maratha, SSC.
versus
INDIAN BROADCASTING FOUNDATION .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. with
Ms. Ishita Farsaiya, Mr. Sparsh
Bhargava, Mr. Apoorv Shukla
and Ms. Prabhleen Kaur
Shukla, Advs.
17
+ ITA 470/2023
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS)
.....Appellant
Through: Mr. Abhishek Maratha, SSC.
versus
INDIAN BROADCASTING FOUNDATION
.....Respondent
Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. with
Ms. Ishita Farsaiya, Mr. Sparsh
Bhargava, Mr. Apoorv Shukla
and Ms. Prabhleen Kaur
Shukla, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA
ORDER
% 05.08.2024
1. We take note of the principal issues which stood flagged in our order dated 21 August 2023. Pursuant to the liberty so granted, the respondent-assessee has placed additional documents on the record.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/08/2024 at 22:10:20
2. From those documents, Mr. Vohra, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent-assessee, points out that the assessee has been able to establish that the investments in Broadcast Audience Research Counsel [„BARC‟] were made pursuant to a directive of the Union Government. It was the submission of learned senior counsel that even if the Court were to assume that there was a failure to comply with the statutory mandate of Section 11(2) and 11(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [„Act‟], the appellant‟s case would not proceed any further bearing in mind the provisions made in Section 164(2) of the Act. That provision is extracted hereinbelow:-
"(2) In the case of relevant income which is derived from property held under trust wholly for charitable or religious purposes, or which is of the nature referred to in sub-clause (ii-a) of clause (24) of Section 2, or which is of the nature referred to in sub-section (4-A) of Section 11, tax shall be charged on so much of the relevant income as is not exempt under Section 11 or Section 12, as if the relevant income not so exempt were the income of an association of persons:
Provided that in a case where the whole or any part of the relevant income is not exempt under Section 11 or Section 12 by virtue of the provisions contained in clause (c) or clause (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 13, tax shall be charged on the relevant income or part of relevant income at the maximum marginal rate."
3. Mr. Vohra had laid emphasis on the Proviso appended to sub- section (2) of Section 164 to submit that since in the present case, no dividend or other income was earned from the investment, no part of the income could have been subjected to tax.
4. Mr. Maratha, learned counsel for the appellant, however, submits that quite apart from the findings returned with reference to Section 13(1)(d), the Assessing Officer had also alluded to sub-section (4) thereof. It was his submission that since the investments would be liable to be viewed as being made by a person specified in sub-section This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/08/2024 at 22:10:20 (3) read along with Explanation 3, the matter would merit further consideration.
5. In order to enable Mr. Maratha to further address submissions, let the appeal be called again on 23.10.2024.
YASHWANT VARMA, J.
RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.
AUGUST 05, 2024/RW This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/08/2024 at 22:10:21