Skip to main content
Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law
Document Fragment View
Matching Fragments
contented that assessee-Trust received more fees which in-turn was
utilized to meet the charitable objects of the Trust. Further, it was pointed
out by the Ld AR that M/s. DDPL didn't charge any rent from the Trust for
utilizing it in the premises owned by M/s DDPL; and thus, the assessee
Trust only benefited from such an arrangement with M/s.DDPL and not
the other way i.e. company M/s. DDPL didn't benefit from such
arrangement. And the Ld AR pointed out that the AO in order to estimate
the compensation for using CT scanner has erroneously brought in some
data based on report of Inspector, which copy was never given to
assessee, so, according to Ld AR, the estimation is erroneous and flawed.
The AO has noted at Para No.9(b) that the 'Siemens CT Scanner' was the
only machine in the M/s. DDPL premise. The Ld.AR also pointed out inter
alia several factual inconsistencies given by AO and pointed out some of
them and especially drew our attention to Para No.9(d) of his
reassessment order that the AO acknowledged that a perusal of accounts
of the company M/s. DDPL would show that they have fully and entirely
transferred to the assessee Trust, the fees from the use of 'Siemens CT
Scanner', whereas his entire case was that M/s DDPL doesn't give
adequate compensation for use of CT scanner to assessee-Trust. And the
Ld CIT(A)/NFAC after appreciating the facts, have correctly deleted Rs
2.14 cr & Rs 19,59,537/-, by passing a speaking order. Thus, the Ld AR
urged us to uphold the action of Ld CIT(A).
Trust [Dr. P.S.Nagendran, Managing Director of M/s. DDPL] 'as to why'
the assessee-Trust property, 'Siemens CT Scanner' was installed in the
premise of the company, M/s. DDPL, he replied that "the said machine is
exclusively used for cancer patients and cardiac patients. It is used for
internal radiation. Since the Dhevaki Heart Hospital and Cancer Hospital is
situated in the Dhevaki Scan Premises, we have installed the machine at
Dhevaki Scans. This machine is exclusively used for brachy therapy,
angiograms to detect the cardiac vessels blocks. The machine is also used
for treatment under Chief Minister Health Insurance Scheme Patients.
Therefore, this machine is kept in Dhevaki Scans". The AO also noted
that the answer to the Q.No.12, as to whether the said CT scanner was
used for commercial purpose. Dr. K. Dhevaki deposed that "the machine
was very rarely used for commercial purpose and the said amount has
been transferred to the trust". Thus, according to the assessee, by
making available the CT Scanner to M/s.DDPL, the assessee-Trust would
get more fees which in-turn was utilized to meet the charitable objects of
the Trust and asserted with the aid of corroborating evidence that the
entire fees from CT scanner collected by M/s. DDPL were transferred to
assessee Trust. Further, it was pointed out that M/s. DDPL didn't charge
any rent from the Trust for using the machine at its premises, and thus,
the assessee Trust only benefited from such an arrangement with
M/s.DDPL and not the other way i.e. company M/s. DDPL didn't benefit
ITA Nos.1302 to 1304/Chny/2023 (AYs 2014-15 to 2016-17)
CO Nos.1 to 3/Chny/2024 (AYs 2014-15 to 2016-17)
M/s.D.N. Public Charitable Trust
:: 18 ::
ITA Nos.1302 to 1304/Chny/2023 (AYs 2014-15 to 2016-17)
CO Nos.1 to 3/Chny/2024 (AYs 2014-15 to 2016-17)
M/s.D.N. Public Charitable Trust
:: 27 ::
Entitlement to exemption under section 11-merely because the assessee is
charging fees from the patients for providing diagnostic service, whether
exemption under section 11 of the Act could be denied or not? Held that We
have carefully gone through the trust deed of the assessee. Clause 15 of the
trust deed clearly says that no funds shall be applied or paid or distributed
among the trustees and shall be applied towards furtherance of the objects of
the trust. Even at the time of dissolution, it shall be devoted to the objects
similar to those of the trust. Therefore, the profit of the assessee-trust is
applied only for charitable activity and there was a prohibition in the trust deed
to divert the funds for any other object. Therefore, this Tribunal is of the
considered opinion that merely because the assessee is charging fees for
diagnostic service, it cannot be said that the assessee is not doing any
charitable activity. Thus, the lower authorities are not justified in denying the
assessee relief under section 11 of the Act as it is not doing any charitable
activity.