Case Details

Citation(s)
1984 SLG 849 1984 SLD 849 (1984) 150 ITR 142
Karnataka High Court
30848
K., JAGANNATHA SHETTY AND S.A. HAKEEM, JJ.

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

Commissioner of IncomE tax

v.

Saraswath Poor Students Fund

Law:

Section:

Section 10(22) of the income-tax act, 1961-Exemption-Educational institution-Assessee-society's object was to constitute fund for extending financial help to students and promotion of education, or allied purposes, of poor students-It had no object to establish any educational institution to impart education to students-Whether assessee could be treated as educational institution under section 10(22)-Held, on facts, no. Facts The assessee-society was a registered one and its main object was to constitute a fund for extending financial help to students and promotion of education or allied purposes, of poor students of a particular community. The assessee claimed exemption as an educational institution under section 10(22). The ITO granted exemption under Section 11. But the Tribunal held that the assessee-society was entitled to exemption under section 10(22). On reference: Held Though it is true that the assessee in order to claim the benefit under section 10(22) need not itself impart education to students, in the instant case, the primary object of the assessee was just to finance the students to pursue their education. Its sole object was to extend assistance in cash or kind to poor or deserving students. It had no object to establish any educational institution to impart education to students. The activities of the assessee were indeed charitable, but to say that it was an 'educational institution' was not correct. The assessee, which extended financial assistance to students for their educational purposes, would squarely and fairly fall under section 11 and not under section 10(22). Accordingly, the assessee-society was not entitled to exemption under section 10(22). Case review Secondary Board of Education v. ITO [1972] 86 ITR 408 (Ori.) distinguished. IT REFERENCE CASE NOS. 107 TO 109 OF 1983. Cases Referred to S. Azeez Basha v. Union of India AIR 1968 SC 662, CIT v. Academy of General Education [1984] 150 ITR 135 (Kar.),Katra Education Society v. ITO [1978] 111 ITR 420 (All.), Addl CIT v. Aditanar Educational Institution [1979] 118 ITR 235 (Mad.), Governing Body of Rangaraya Medical College v. ITO [1979] 117 ITR 284 (AP), Secondary Board of Education v.…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492