Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.38 seconds)

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs G.D. Naidu, Industrial Educational ... on 2 February, 1942

4. The Ld AR submitted that as per Para 2.3 of impugned order it is noted by the Ld CIT that one of the objects of society is to run institution/s to provide qualitative education which ipso facto qualifies as eligible charitable object defined u/s 2(15) of the Act. He further submitted that the Ld. CIT has further noted in same Para that the society is only running a school in the name and style of Saraswati High School, Village Begampur Khatola, VPO Khandsa Gurgaon which amply demonstrates that the real 3 purpose of the society is education. The Ld. AR submitted that this was further highlighted with reference to same Para about the factum of not carrying of any other activities as mentioned in other objects which further proves the genuineness of the objects of the assessee society being limited to education. The Ld. AR also referred to the Paper Book and submitted that for three consecutive years, in assessee's own case, the revenue has, u/s 143(3) assessments, for assessment years 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15, accepted that the assessee society is meant for education only and is doing only education activity. It was submitted that no exception is drawn in these orders to the exemption claimed/allowed u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act. 4.1 The Ld. AR also referred to the impugned order and submitted that the grounds relied upon by the Ld. CIT for rejecting the application u/s 12AA are alien and extraneous to the parameters laid down by the various courts. It was submitted that the courts have held from time to time that the approach to be adopted at the time of granting of registration should be limited to verifying the real purpose of the society etc and the genuineness of its objects which in present case is admittedly fulfilled.
Madras High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1