Ita/153/2015 Of Wyeliffe India v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
05 Aug 2015 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court Β· highcourtofkerala
Parties
Ita/153/2015 Of Wyeliffe India v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
05 Aug 2015
Assessment year(s)
β
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Ita/153/2015 Of Wyeliffe India v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2015) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: In such acase, we do not find any fault in the orders impugned rejecting the application of the appellant and confirming the same.Appeal fails and accordingly it is dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below β read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order β as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC &THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST 2015/14TH SRAVANA, 1937
ITA.No. 153 of 2015 ()
-----------------------
AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA 233/2014 of INCOME TAX APPELLATETRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN DATED 05-12-2014
APPELLANT:
-------------------
WYELIFFE INDIA HOUSE NO.340(1), KARIMALA, KATTODE MANJADI PO, THIRUVALLA - 689 105
BY ADVS.SRI.MOHAN PULIKKAL SRI.R.SUDHIR SMT.MANJU RAJAN SRI.P.P.NARAYANAN
RESPONDENT:
----------------------------
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX KOTTAYAM
BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX
THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSIONON 05-08-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THEFOLLOWING:
ITA.No. 153 of 2015
APPENDIX
APPELLANT'S ANNEXURES:
ANNEXURE β A: TRUE COPY OF THE TRUST DEED DATED 02-02-2010
ANNEXURE β B: TRUE COPY OF THE SUPPLEMENTARY TRUST DEEDDATED 28-12-2010.
ANNEXURE β C: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 23-08-2011FROM THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, THIRUVALLA.
ANNEXURE β D: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 17-08-2011FROM THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTTAYAM.
ANNEXURE β E: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 01.09.2011 OFTHE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTTAYAM.
ANNEXURE β F: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28-06-2013 OFTHE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH, IN ITANO.547/COCH/2011.
ANNEXURE β G: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18-03-2014 OFTHE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTTAYAM.
ANNEXURE β H: SPECIMENS OF THE ALPHABETS DEVISED BY THEAPPELLANT TRUST.
ANNEXURE β I: PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THELEARNING CENTRES RUN BY THE TRUST.
ANNEURE β J: TRUE COPIES OF THE ACITVITY REPORTS OF THETRUST DURING THE YEAR 2011, 2012 AND 2013.
ANNEXURE β K: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE INCOME TAXAPPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.233/C/2014.
RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
smv
ANTONY DOMINIC
&
SHAJI P. CHALY, JJ.
-----------------------------------------------I.T.A. No.153 of 2015
-----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 5[th] day of August, 2015
JUDGMENT
Antony Dominic,J.
Appellant is a trust. Their application for registrationunder Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act was rejected. Thatwas confirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax and also theTribunal. It is in these circumstances, the appellant has filedthis appeal.
2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant and thelearned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.
3. Evaluating the facts of the case, the Tribunal has heldthus:
βx x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xThe CIT, therefore opined that the objectspertain to charitable and religious activities.However, on a perusal of the Income &Expenditure A/c for the year ended 31.03.2012& 31.03.2013, it is seen that the majority of theexpensesincurredmainlyrelatesto
administrative expenses, viz., advertisementexpenses, allowance to staff, audit fee, bankcharges, honorarium, incentive to staff,maintenance, rent, salary to staff, stipend,travel expenses. The sum total of the aboveitems of expenditure comes to aroundRs.22,84,224/- out of the total income ofRs.25,89,124/- for the year ended 31.03.2012.Similarly for the year ended 31.03.2013, out ofthe total income of Rs.36,00,305/- an amount ofRs.28,98,300/- has been expended on account ofadministrative expenses. Thus, the CITobserved that only a negligible amount has beenutilized for any charitable or religious activitiesfor the above period. He further noted thatthere are only three trustees and the activitiesare seen carried out as if it is a businessconcern. x x x x x x x x x x x x xx x x x x x x x x x x x x x x β
4. These facts are undisputed. This, therefore, shows thatthe appellant is not carrying on any activity entitling it forregistration under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act. In such acase, we do not find any fault in the orders impugned rejecting
the application of the appellant and confirming the same.Appeal fails and accordingly it is dismissed.
Sd/-
ANTONY DOMINIC
JUDGE
Sd/-JUDGE
SHAJI P. CHALY
smv
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only β not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CAβclient relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.