In the ITAT Delhi Bench, ‘F’

Additional Director of Income-tax (Exemption) Training Circle-III, New Delhi

v.

Manav Bharati Child Institute & Child Psychology

P.N. PARASHAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER

AND DEEPAK R. SHAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

IT APPEAL NO. 512 (DELHI) OF 2006

C.O. NO. 131 (DELHI) OF 2007

[Assessment year 2001-02]

September 28, 2007

Section 11, read with sections 12 and 13, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Charitable or religious trust - Exemption of income from property held under - Assessment year 2001-02 - Whether so long as objects of a society are for charitable purposes, merely because there is some surplus in activities carried out by society, it would not disentitle it to claim exemption under sections 11 and 12 - Held, yes - Whether there is no prohibition in Act to remunerate interested person but such remuneration should be commensurate with services rendered by them and so found, it cannot be said that provisions of section 13(1)(c) are attracted so as to deny benefit of exemption under sections 11 and 12 - Held, yes

Section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Charitable or religious trust - Exemption of income from property held under - Assessment year 2001-02 - Whether though filing of Form No. 10 in respect of accumulation of income is mandatory to claim exemption under sections 11 and 12 but same can be filed at any time during pendency of assessment proceedings - Held, yes - Whether if Form No. 10 is filed, benefit of accumulation of income for charitable purpose cannot be denied - Held, yes

FACTS

The assessee-society was running an educational institution and was enjoying exemption under section 10(22) in the past. During the assessment year 2001-02, the assessee filed an application for registration under section 10(23C)(vi) during the pendency of which, the assessee claimed exemption under sections 11 and 12. The Assessing Officer found that financial benefits were provided to the relatives of the Chairman, Members of Governing Board and Members of the society. He also observed that huge surplus arose to the assessee during the year which showed that activities of the assessee was profit earning activity and not entirely for educational purposes. On that basis, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee had infringed the provisions of section 13(1)(c) and, hence, benefit of exemption under sections 11 and 12 would not be allowed to it. The other reason for denying the exemption under sections 11 and 12 was that the assessee had not filed Form No. 10 in respect of surplus of income while claiming exemption. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) found that the payments were made to the members of the society for the services rendered by them. He further found that the assessee-society existed solely for educational purposes since 1972 and was running two schools; all the receipts of the society had been exclusively used for the purpose of society and the surplus generated had also been applied for construction of new blocks for educational activities which was the main object of the society and there was no finding of the Assessing Officer that surplus had been utilized for any non-charitable activity or any other object; the profit/surplus which had been generated had not been applied for any personal purposes. Therefore, considering the said fact, he held that the exemption under sections 11 and 12 could not be denied and directed the Assessing Officer to compute income under sections 11 and 12 till the decision on application under section 10(23C) (vi).

On appeal, the assessee raised a cross objection that form No. 10 can be filed at any time during pendency of assessment proceedings.

HELD

In the instant case the assessee had been claiming and being allowed exemption under section 10(22) which could be allowed only when the assessee was an educational institution and existing solely for educational purposes and not for the purpose of profit. Thus, the contention of the Assessing Officer that huge surplus was accruing to the assessee and exemption under sections 11 and 12 was not admissible was devoid of merits. So long as the object are for charitable purposes, merely because there is some surplus in the activities carried out by the society same would not disentitle it to claim exemption under sections 11 and 12. Such exemption under sections 11 and 12 can be denied provided there is violation as contemplated in section 13. Under section 13(1)(c) only where the income or property is used for applying directly or indirectly for the benefit of any person like author of the trust or the person who has made substantial contribution or any trustee or manager or any relative of such aforesaid person, etc., is given. As found by the Commissioner (Appeals), the payments made to person referred to in sub-section (3) of section 13 were for the services rendered by those persons and which was commensurate with the nature of services rendered. There is no prohibition in the Act to remunerate the interested person but such remuneration should be commensurate with the services rendered by them. If so found, it cannot be said that provisions of section 13(1)(c) are attracted so as to deny benefit of exemption under sections 11 and 12. Since it was found by the Commissioner (Appeals) that payment was not undue or unreasonable, the exemption under sections 11 and 12 could not be denied. Accordingly, there was no ground to deny the benefit of sections 11 and 12. [Para 3]

As regards, the cross objection of the assessee in respect of filing of Form No. 10, various courts have time and again held that though filing of Form No. 10 in respect of accumulation of surplus income is mandatory to claim exemption under sections 11 and 12, the same can be filed at any time during the pendency of assessment proceedings. If Form No. 10 is filed, the benefit of accumulation of income for charitable purpose cannot be denied. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer was to be directed to compute the income after allowing exemption under sections 11 and 12 and also considering the application in Form No. 10 regarding accumulation of surplus income for the purpose of objects of trust. [Para 5]

Case referred to

CIT v. Mayur Foundation [2005] 274 ITR 562 (Guj.) (para 4).

Dinga Charan Dash for the Appellant. Smt. Lalita Krishnamurthy for the Respondent.

 

nn