Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.22 seconds)
Vignana Jyothi, Secunderabad vs Asst.Dit(Exemptions)-Iii, ... on 22 September, 2017 cites

Exhibition Society, Hyd, Hyderabad vs Adit(Exemptions)-I, Hyd, Hyderabad on 16 November, 2016

11. Thus, the Tribunal has clearly held that there is no violation of the provisions of the A.P. Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Prohibition of Capitation Fees Act of 1983). It is also mentioned that the assessee has received the donations by way of DDs/Cheques which are duly accounted for in its books of account and has also been applied for the purpose of education only. Having held that the activities of the assessee trust are charitable in nature and the donations are permitted by the memorandum and there is no complaint that the assessee was collecting any fees more than what was prescribed, it cannot be said that the assessee has violated any of the conditions for claiming exemption u/s 11 of the Act. We also find that the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Voditala Educational Society Vs. ADIT (cited Supra) was considering the case of an assessee where there is a finding that the assessee therein was collecting money over and above the prescribed fee from students and in such circumstances, it was held that it was to be classified as capitation fee and therefore, not eligible for exemption u/s 11 of the Act. In the case before us, it is seen that the assessee has received donations from various persons and more than 50% of the donations are from people who are not at all concerned with the admission of the students whereas the AO has disallowed the entire donations. It is also seen that all the Page 9 of 11 ITA Nos 1803 1804 1752 and 1753 of 2014 Vignana Jyothi Secunderabad donations are recorded in the books of account of the assessee and most of the parents and relatives of the students also have stated that the donations are voluntary. Only a few parents of the students have stated that the donations are connected with the admissions and some of these statements have also been retracted subsequently. There is also no finding that the assessee has misused or not used the donations for any other purpose than the purpose for which they have been given i.e. for educational purpose. In such circumstances, we are of the opinion that the exemption u/s 11 of the Act cannot be denied in toto to the assessee with regard to the voluntary donations received by the assessee. Only such donations, which are admittedly not voluntary can be disallowed. AO is directed accordingly.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad Cites 9 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Tma Pai Foundation vs State Of Karnataka on 4 November, 1993

12. That leads us to the question whether the assessee has violated the rules and regulations of the government of Andhra Pradesh framed for the purpose of prohibiting the collection of Capitation fees? One of the grounds on which the revenue has relied is that the assessee has violated the Page 7 of 11 ITA Nos 1803 1804 1752 and 1753 of 2014 Vignana Jyothi Secunderabad provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act, 1983 which prohibited collection of any fee other than the fee fixed by the Govt. The ld DR has placed before us the copy of the G.O.Ms.33, dt.11-06-2003 issued by the government of Andhra Pradesh to implement the judgment of the apex court in the case of T.M.A. Pai Foundation (supra) by framing the rules and regulations for admission of students into professional colleges. As per these rules, the fee prescribed per student admitted to an engineering college under the management quota was up to a sum of Rs.75,000/ per annum. There is no allegation that assessee has collected any fee in excess of such prescribed amount. In addition to the above fee notified, the assessee has also collected the donations not only from some parents/ relatives bit also from members of Society. Whether such collection of donation is prohibited by the Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act, 1983 is to be examined.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 214 - S R Pandian - Full Document

Escorts Limited And Anr. Etc. Etc vs Union Of India And Ors on 22 October, 1992

13. As regards the assessee's appeals are concerned, we find that the CIT (A) has disallowed the depreciation on the ground that the cost of the assets have already been allowed as application of income in the earlier years. This issue had come up for consideration before the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of (i) A.P. Olympic Association vs. ADIT (E) 48 Taxmann.com 282 (Hyd) and (ii) Guru Nanak Mission Trust vs. DDIT (E) 69 Taxmann.com 82 (Hyd) in which, after considering the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd vs. Union of India (199 ITR 43) and also the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Vishwa Jagruti Mission (IT Page 10 of 11 ITA Nos 1803 1804 1752 and 1753 of 2014 Vignana Jyothi Secunderabad Appeal No.140 of 2012 dated 29.3.2012) as well as the decision of the Coordinate Bench in the case of Venkata Sai Educational Society in ITA No.1440/Hyd/2011 dated 9.4.2012, it has been held that charitable or religious trusts registered u/s 12A of the Act can claim benefit u/s 11 in the form of application of funds as well as depreciation u/s 132 in respect of property held under the trust. Respectfully following the decisions of the Coordinate Benches of this Tribunal, the assessee's appeals are also allowed.
Supreme Court of India Cites 40 - Cited by 484 - Full Document
1