India International Centre I T A T Delhi
S.
2(15)/11: Before any activity can be branded as being in the nature of
trade or commerce, the AO has to demonstrate the intention of parties
backed with facts and figures of carrying out activities with profit
motive. Mere surplus from any activity which has been undertaken to
achieve the dominant object does not imply that the same is run with
profit motive. The intention has to be gathered from circumstances which
compelled the carrying on the activity
(i) The third proviso to section 143(3), requiring the AO to
examine the applicability of proviso to section 2(15) in case of
institutions notified u/s 10(23C)(iv) in view of insertion of 17th
proviso to section 10(23C), was not on statute book at the time when
assessment order was passed and since the notification remained in force
the invocation of section 263 by DIT(E) was not justified in view of
the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Max India Ltd.
(ii) From the detailed submissions of assessee, reproduced earlier,
which have not been controverted by department, we fail to understand as
to how these activities can be said to have an iota of commercial/
trade colour. The dominant object of the assessee is definitely for the
well being of public at large by organizing various seminars for the
welfare of people by disseminating knowledge in various fields in order
to uplift the social consciousness of the society at large. (The
composition of membership clearly exemplifies the real intention of
assessee. We fail to understand as to how the hostel accommodation
provided to various invitees could be considered as a commercial
activity. Before any activity can be branded as being in the nature of
trade or commerce, the AO has to demonstrate the intention of parties
Backed with facts and figures of carrying out activities with profit
motive. Mere surplus from any activity, which undisputedly has been
undertaken to achieve the dominant object, does not imply that the same
is run with profit motive. The intention has to be gathered from
circumstances which compelled the carrying on an activity. In the
present case, ld. counsel has clearly demonstrated that surplus was
generated from interest income and not from catering or hostel
activities. Therefore, the objection of ld. DIT(E) does not survive on
this count also.
(iii) The primary object of insertion of proviso to section 2(15) was
to curb the practice of earning income by way of carrying on of trade
or commerce and claiming the same as exempt in the garb of pursuing the
alleged charitable object of general public utility. This proviso never
meant to deny the exemption to those institutions, where the predominant
object is undeniably a charitable object and in order to achieve the
same incidental activities, essential in the given circumstances, are
carried on (India Trade Promotion Organization Vs. Director General of
incomew Tax (Exemptions) & Others (WP(C) no. 1872/2013 dated
22-1-2015) 2015-TIOL-227-HC-DEL-IT followed)

No comments:
Post a Comment