The Indian Institute of Architects v. ITO

Case snapshot

Sections / provisions: 11

Questions before the Court / Tribunal

• S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes-Education-Study and promote the latest development in the field of Architecture-Mere surplus arising as a result of charitable activities the Institution does not cease to be a charitable institution-Entitle to exemption. [S. 2(15), 12A, Architect Act, 1872] The assessee is a trust registered with the Charity Commissioner and also under section 12A of the Income-tax Act,; The assessee plays a major role in promoting the profession of architect by organising and uniting the Architects of India. The Assessee has shown income from membership fee advertisement, sale of…
• What factual, statutory and procedural conditions control the relief?
• How does the operative order apply to the parties and the challenged proceeding?

Material facts and procedural background

The Indian Institute of Architects 5th Floor, Prospect Chambers Annexe ……………. Appellant D.N. Road, Fort, Mumbai 400 001 PAN – AAATT5904C

Assessee by : Shri K. Shivaram a/w Shri Mandar Vaidya Revenue by : Shri B.K. Bagchi

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the

2. In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:

“1. The Ld. CIT(A) fell in error of law in declining to the assessee the benefit of section 11, on the ground that the activities of the benefit its own member/professionals. The view of the Ld. CIT(A) runs contrary to the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Bar Council of Maharashtra V/s. CIT 126 ITR 27 (Bom.).

Appellant / assessee submissions

assessee submitted that its membership is, inter-alia, recognised as

and in education. Accordingly, the assessee submitted that its primary

Counsel submitted that assessee conducts examinations/seminar for the

submitted that Associate Membership of the assessee institute has been

Revenue / respondent submissions

The packaged judgment does not separately label the respondent's submissions in an independently extractable passage. No contention is inferred; read the full order.

Court / Tribunal analysis and reasoning

7. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material

we find that the Associate Membership of the assessee institute (by

9. We find that this objection/grievance of the Revenue has been taken up for the first time across the bar. There is no such objection taken before the authorities by the Revenue. Besides, nothing has been shown to us why it should be considered as a coaching class. Further, we find that the impugned order of the Tribunal has only applied the decision of this court in Samudra Institute of Maritime Studies Trust (supra) to conclude that the activities which are run by the respondent-institute is an educational activity and not in the nature of running a coaching centre or a class. The Revenue is not able to point why it would not apply. We may also point out that the grant or refusal to grant exemption under section 10(22) and/or (23C) of the Act cannot govern the application of section 11 of the Act. In any case, we are informed that no appeals in respect of section 10(22) and/or (23C)(vi) of the Act are pending disposal.

Operative decision and relief

In appeal, learned CIT(A) vide impugned order dismissed the appeal filed

“7. On further appeal, the impugned order of the Tribunal allowed the respondent-assessee's appeal. The impugned order of the Tribunal after examining the object clause as given in the memorandum of association gave a finding that the respondent institute has been created for the purpose of development of banking personnel for/in the banking industry. The institute imparts education to the candidates who are connected with the banking industry. It has library facility, organizes lectures, seminars and undertake examinations for promoting bank officers. In the aforesaid context, the impugned order of the Tribunal concluded on facts which were before the Revenue Authorities that it exists for advancement of learning in the field of banking. Besides, on facts it found the fee structure of the institute for these courses was not on the higher side. Further, the impugned order places reliance upon the decision of this court in DIT (Exemption) v. Samudra Institute of Maritime Studies Trust [2014] 49 taxmann.com 510/226 Taxman 297/369 ITR 645 to inter alia hold that the activity which is carried out by the respondent-assessee is educational in nature. This is for the reason that it…

12. In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed.

Ratio and legal principle

• The packaged judgment addresses S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes-Education-Study and promote the latest development in the field of Architecture-Mere surplus arising as a result of charitable activities the Institution does not cease to be a charitable institution-Entitle to exemption. [S. 2(15), 12A, Architect Act, 1872] The assessee is a trust registered with the Charity Commissioner and also under section 12A of the Income-tax Act,; The assessee plays a major role in promoting the profession of architect by organising and uniting the Architects of India. The Assessee has shown income from membership fee advertisement, sale of…. The precise proposition must be read with the Court/Tribunal's reasoning and operative directions.
• Reliance depends on matching the statutory version, jurisdiction, procedural stage and material evidence recorded in the judgment.

Why this judgment matters

This decision is relevant to practitioners and affected parties dealing with s. 11 : property held for charitable purposes-education-study and promote the latest development in the field of architecture-mere surplus arising as a result of charitable activities the institution does not cease to be a charitable institution-entitle to exemption. [s. 2(15), 12a, architect act, 1872] the assessee is a trust registered with the charity commissioner and also under section 12a of the income-tax act,; the assessee plays a major role in promoting the profession of architect by organising and uniting the architects of india. the assessee has shown income from membership fee advertisement, sale of… Its value lies in showing how the adjudicating forum connected the applicable rule to the proved facts and procedural posture.

Practitioner action points

• Match the statutory version, jurisdiction, procedural stage and decisive evidence before relying on the result.
• Verify current appellate, review and SLP history and any later amendment or controlling authority.
• Attach the complete judgment to the working paper or filing and cite the paragraph/page supporting the proposition.

Does this case match your facts?

Section / provision impact

• 11 - apply the exact version considered in the judgment.

Case network

Similar issue / useful comparison

• Heart Foundation of India v. CIT - ITAT Mumbai
• Ramesh Kumar Patodia Vs Citibank N.A. - Court / Tribunal to be verified
• ACIT vs. ARMEE INFOTECH - Court / Tribunal to be verified

Different outcome / possible distinction

• Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax , Kanpur Vs AR Polymers Pvt ltd - Quashed / set aside
• Ambaradi Seva Sahkari Mandali Ltd. & Others - Allowed

Related Finin2min resources

• Case Law Hub
• Search all judgments
• Income-tax study guide

Full judgment and source control

Read / download packaged judgment record

Source class: Sanitized local full-judgment copy; official primary replacement pending · Repository status: Published