The Director Of Income Tax(Exemption) Chennai – 34 v. M/S. The Ida Scudder Schoolassociation, Virudhampet,Vellore – 632 006

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 28.11.2018 CORAM:THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMand THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR The Director of Income Tax(Exemption) Chennai – 34... Appellant/Respondent Vs M/s. The Ida Scudder SchoolAssociation, virudhampet,Vellore – 632 006. .. Respondent/Appellant Tax Case Appeal is filed under Section 260-A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 (for brevity 'the Act') against the order of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, dated03.11.2010 in ITA No.1417/Mds/2010 preferred against the orderdated 25/06/2010 made in DIT(E) No.2 (847)/09-10 passed by theDirector of Income Tax(Exemptions), Chennai. JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.) This Tax Case Appeal is filed by the Revenue underSection 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order ofthe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, dated03.11.2010 in ITA No.1417/Mds/2010. 2.Heard Mr.S.Rajesh, learned counsel for the appellantand Mr.Gourav Natarajan for Mr.S.Rama Subramanian & Associates,learned counsel for the respondents.3.This appeal has been admitted on 26.04.2011 on thefollowing Substantial Question of Law: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ “Whether on the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal can direct the appellant togrant registration under Section 12AA andapproval under Section 80G and to go beyond thelegislation to grant registration?” 4.This appeal arises out of an order passed by theTribunal setting aside the rejection of the application fled bythe respondent for registration under Section 12AA of the Act.The appellant examined the application filed by the respondentdated 04.12.2009 and noted the object of the assessment and heldthat the object Clause speaks about profiting a particularreligion and a trust doing religious activities are not eligiblefor registration under Section 12AA of the Act along withbenefits of exemption under Section 80G of the Act. 5.Accordingly, the application filed for registrationunder Section 12AA was lodged and consequently, an applicationfiled for exemption under Section 80G was rejected. Therespondent/assessee carried the matter to the Tribunal and theTribunal once again examined objectives of the trust and hasgiven following reasons as to why the trust cannot be treated asreligious body. 6.We extract the relevant portion of the order passed bythe Tribunal.“We find that the DIT(Exemptions)had gone off-tangent and did not understandthat the spirit of Christ, by itself hadnothing religious in it. Christ neveradvocated any particular religion. Thespirit of Christ is clear from the parablesnarrated by Jesus Christ. One of theparables talks about “help, given by apasser-by to a person lying on the streetwho was injured critically.” Religion of theperson who was lying injured nor the personhelping him was not mentioned. Anotherparable of Jesus Christ talks about the needto love thy neighbour as one would lovehimself. There is no qualification for theneighbour mentioned, much less anythingabout his religion. Thus the spirit ofChrist lies in helping others irrespectiveof cast, creed and religion.” 7.The Tribunal after analyzing the objectives of thetrust, found it to be for the purpose of helping othersirrespective of caste, creed and religion and the object was toprovide education and the object was found to be philanthropic.The Revenue has not been able to dislodge the finding given by https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the Tribunal with any admissible material. Therefore, we are ofthe considered view that the order passed by the Tribunal isjust and proper and does not call for any interference. 7.The Tribunal after analyzing the objectives of thetrust, found it to be for the purpose of helping othersirrespective of caste, creed and religion and the object was toprovide education and the object was found to be philanthropic.The Revenue has not been able to dislodge the finding given by https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the Tribunal with any admissible material. Therefore, we are ofthe considered view that the order passed by the Tribunal isjust and proper and does not call for any interference. 8.Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Revenue isdismissed and the Substantial Question of Law is answeredagainst the Revenue. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. Nocosts. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mrm/kmm To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Chennai 2. The Director of Income Tax, (Exemption), Chennai -34. +1cc to M/s.S.Ramasubramanian and Associates, Advocate, S.R.No.81582+1cc to Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, Advocate, S.R.No.81867 T.C.(A).No.178 of 2011 SAI(CO)rrs 25/01/2019