Click Here For Best Books On Taxation & Law. Upto 60% Off On Select Titles. Free Shipping & Pay On Delivery!
 

Click Here To Subscribe To Our Free Newsletter

Home › All Judgements › Disha India Micro Credit vs. CIT (ITAT Delhi)

Disha India Micro Credit vs. CIT (ITAT Delhi)

Posted on by editor — 1 Comment ↓
COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: February 17, 2011 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE:
CITATION:

Click here to download the judgement (disha_micro_finance_charitable.pdf)

Activity of giving micro-finance & earning interest is “charitable purpose”

The assessee, a micro-finance company, applied for registration u/s 12A for exemption u/s 11. The CIT rejected the application on the ground that (a) the objects showed a profit motive, (b) the assessee was charging an interest rate which was higher than that charged by banks & (c) the activity of giving loans was a business activity and not a “charitable purpose” u/s 2(15). On appeal by the assessee, HELD allowing the appeal:

(i) On the issue whether the assessee has a “profit motive” in pursuing its objects, the fact that the assessee is registered u/s 25 of the Companies Act prima facie shows that the assessee is set up to promote “charity or any other useful object” and intends to apply its profits in promoting those objects. The assessee is prohibited from making payment of any dividend to its members. The Objects provide that the assessee has to promote micro finance services to poor persons and to help them rise out of poverty without the motive of profit;

(ii) On the issue whether the activity of promoting micro finance services is a “charitable purpose” u/s 2(15), as per CBDT Circular No.11 of 2008 dated 19.12.2008, a wide range of objects for the welfare of economically and socially disadvantaged people are covered and entities which pursue these objects will be eligible for exemption even if they incidentally carry on a commercial activity, subject, however, to the conditions stipulated in s. 11(4A) or the seventh proviso to s.10(23C) (Bharatha Swamukhi Samsthe 28 DTR (Bang)(Trib) 113 followed);

(iii) The fact that there is a surplus from the activity of micro financing cannot by itself be a ground to say that the assessee does not exist for charitable purpose particularly when the MOA & AOA provide that the profit shall not be distributed amongst the members but shall be utilized towards the objects (Thanthi Trust 247 ITR 785 (SC) & Agricultural Produce and Market Committee 291 ITR 419 (Bom) followed)

Note: Janalakshmi Social Services vs. DIT 33 SOT 197 (Bang) which held that micro financing if done on commercial lines is not a charitable activity was not followed on the ground that there the finance was provided only to a particular section of society and the loans were given at “exorbitant” rates of interest. See also Spandana (Rural & Urban Development Organisation) 40 DTR 153 (Visakha)(Trib) & article: Don’t Malign MFIs

Related Posts:

  • ITO vs. Virat Credit & Holdings Pvt.Ltd (ITAT Delhi) Apparently, from the approval recorded and words used that “Yes. I am satisfied.”, it has proved on record that the sanction is merely mechanical and Addl.CIT has not applied independent mind while according sanction as there is not an iota of material on record as to what documents he had…
  • India Today Online Pvt. Ltd vs. ITO (ITAT Delhi) Rule 11UA will apply only if option is exercised in sub-clause (i), but if the assessee has been able to substantiate the fair market value in terms of sub-clause (ii), then valuation done by the assessee cannot be rejected simply on the ground that it does not stand the test…
  • DCIT vs. Caparo Engineering India P. Ltd (ITAT Delhi) The Assessing Officer shall redecide this issue afresh after comparing the facts in the case of the assessee with the case of Delhi High Court in Sharp Business Systems (supra) in accordance with law and give clear finding how the case of assessee is covered or not covered by the…
  • Halcrow Consulting India Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Delhi) The scheme of Explanation 7 to section 271(1)(c) of the Act makes it clear that the onus on the assessee is only to show that the ALP was computed by the assessee in accordance with the scheme of section 92 C of the Act in good faith and due diligence.…
  • India Convention and Culture Centre Pvt. Ltd vs. ITO (ITAT Delhi) As per the circle rate prescribed by the competent authority, the value of total assets i.e., the fair market value of the land which was converted from ‘agricultural’ into ‘institutional’ comes to Rs.113,00,72,749/-. If the other assets of Rs.9,17,608/- is added to such asset and the total liability of 46,55,69,537/-…
  • Rajat Exports Import (India) Pvt. Ltd vs. ITO (ITAT Delhi) The assessee was supplied with the seized material at the fag end of the assessment proceedings and assessee sought opportunity to cross examine these persons for rebuttal of the allegation. However, the AO did not provide any opportunity to the assessee to cross examine these persons on behalf of assessee…

Related Judgements

  1. ACIT vs. Prakash I. Shah (ITAT Mumbai) (Special Bench) 

    However, where such gain relates to exports made in an earlier year, the deuction u/s 80HHC is allowable only in the year in which the exports are made and not in the year of realisation of the gain.
    Read more ›
  2. Topman Exports vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai Special Bench) 

    Expl. (baa) to S. 80HHC defines the term “profits of the business” to mean the profits under the head “profits and gains” as reduced by 90% of the sum referred to in s. 28 (iiid). The 2nd & 3rd Provisos to s. 80HHC (3) provide that the profits computed…
  3. Anil Kumar Bhatia vs. ACIT (ITAT Delhi) 

    S. 153A does not authorize the making of a de novo assessment. While under the 1st Proviso, the AO is empowered to frame assessment for six years, under the 2nd Proviso, only the assessments which are pending on the date of initiation of search abate. The effect is that…
  4. DDIT vs. SET Satellite (Singapore) (ITAT Mumbai) 

    Assuming the payment for obtaining cricket telecast rights is “royalty”, under the first limb of Article 12(7) of the DTAA, royalties can be said to have arisen in India only if the payer is a resident of India. This condition is not fulfilled as the assessee was a non-resident….
  5. Krung Thai Bank PCL vs. JDIT (ITAT Mumbai) 

    S. 115 JB can only come into play when the assessee is required to prepare its profit and loss account in accordance with the provisions of Parts II and III of Schedule VI to the Companies Act. The starting point of computation of minimum alternate tax u/s 115 JB…
One comment on “Disha India Micro Credit vs. CIT (ITAT Delhi)”
  1. Nem Singh says:
    February 2, 2015 at 2:27 pm

    As per the provisions of the Act what should have been considered by the department when dealing with the cases in relation to claim u/s 11,12 & 10(23) for charitable act whether their object are charitable in nature and the the MOA & AOA provide that the profit shall not be distributed amongst the members but shall be utilized wholly towards the objects of the organisation or whether they are working for whole society without any cast, creed, class. Whether general public benefited from their activities or not. Earning surplus or profit can not be a major factor to decide the issue because without earning no one can do charity.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*