Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: charitable trust objects in Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, ... vs Cheif Cit, Bhubaneswar on 10 February, 2021Matching Fragments
30. Judgment rendered by Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in case cited as Young Men's Christian Association (supra) is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case because, in the instant case, the assessee has also been granted exemption u/s.12AA of the Act vide order dated 15.01.2013 and the Trust is also found to be eligible for exemption u/s.11 of the Act for block assessment period 01-04-1989 to 22-12-1998 by the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case in order dated 28-07-2015 (supra). Even perusal of the original Trust Deed shows that the predominant object was educational though noneducational objects were also there. So, merely because of the :- 19 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur fact that there were other objects of the Trust, the educational institution did not exist solely for educational purpose. But, in the instant case, the assessee Trust has gone one step further by amending the original Trust Deed vide registered amended Trust Deed dated 26-03-2012 deleting all the non-educational objectives. So, the impugned order passed by Ld.Pr.CCIT is not sustainable.
7.4 The issue therefore arises for our adjudication in v iew of the foregoing pleadings is as to whether the clinching statutory expression employed in section 10(23C)(vi) "existing solely for educational purposes" has to be read in isolation or in complete sense i.e. " any university or college existing solely for educational purposes and not for purposes of profit". In our considered opinion, we ought to read this statutory provision as a whole only than in piece- meal. This is for the reason that the legislature has itself made it clear that the institution concerned has to exist only for educational and not for profit purposes. We wish to repeat that the department; in such a cases has to pin point the material against taxpayer before us which could suggest even an iota of material that it has ever existed for :- 29 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur deriving profits or the object clauses reveal such an element therein.
7.5 Case law Additional CIT Vs. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association, [1980] 121 ITR 0001(SC) held long back in case of an assessee having multiple objects that the test that needs to be applied in such an instance is as to whether the object non-charitable is the main or the preliminary one of the trust or the institution or it is ancillary or incidental to the dominant object which is charitable. We observe at the cost of the repetition that this taxpayer objects; although are multiple in number, but, the predominant one amongst many and only activity carried out since 1997 (supra) is in education only running for a period of almost 25 years as on date and 15 years u pto last AY before us i.e. 2012-13.
13.2 On the issue of illegality at notice u/s 148, the ld. counsel submitted that the Ld. AO has stated that there is nothing found on the face of the record as well as order sheet regarding passing of any speaking order in response :- 48 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur to such objections raised by the assessee with regard to reasons recorded for reopening at assessment u/s 147. The ld. counsel stated that in the absence of any tangible material regarding the escapement of income, the notice issued u/s 148 is bad in law and consequently, the assessment order made u/s .147/143 is also bad in law.