Allowing the appeal of the Revenue the Court held\u00a0 that the Assessing Officer had sufficient cogent reasons to initiate reassessment proceedings under section\u00a0147\u00a0and the Tribunal had erred in holding that the reassessment proceedings were bad in law. The assessee had not denied the factum of charging capitation fee, which was reflected in the seized documents. The Tribunal had invalidated the reassessment proceedings on the basis of difference in quantum of capitation fee collected by the assessee and had relied upon the correctness and sufficiency of the material for initiation of the reassessment proceedings. The difference in the quantum of capitation fee could not be a valid reason for setting aside the reassessment proceedings at the stage of issuance of notice under section\u00a0148. Undeniably, the material seized by the Revenue during the search under section\u00a0132\u00a0and the admission made by the managing trustee of the assessee constituted fresh tangible material which warranted reassessment for the assessment year 2007-08. The reopening of the assessment ought not to have been interdicted by the Tribunal.\u00a0 That the assessee could not claim exemption under sections\u00a011\u00a0and\u00a012\u00a0since it had charged capitation fee which was de hors the objective of a charitable trust. The Tribunal had wrongly sustained the exemption claimed by the assessee.\u00a0\u00a0 The phrase \u00a0wholly\u00a0 used in section 11 elates to the purposes and not to the property of the Trust.\u00a0 The word wholly is different from the word mainly.\u00a0 The word wholly\u00a0\u00a0 should be understood to be closely akin to the phrase \u201esolely’.\u00a0 There is no scope for the purposes of the trusts or institutions\u00a0 being partially public or religious in nature and would not be sufficient if some of the objects are charitable\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 or religious in nature. \u00a0That an order of the Settlement Commission was final and conclusive for a particular assessment year for which the application had been filed. Therefore, the Tribunal had wrongly placed reliance on the decision of the Settlement Commission for subsequent assessment years. Hence the order passed by the Tribunal was set aside. (AY. 2007-08)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Search and Seizure-Trust-Wholly-Capitalisation fee-Statement of managing trustee under oath accepting receipts of capitation fee-Order of Settlement Commission for subsequent year-Order of Tribunal quashing the reassessment is held to be erroneous and set aide.[S. 10(23C)(iv), 11, 12, 12A, 12AA, 132, 148, 245D(6), 260A] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-49566","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-cTs","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49566","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=49566"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49566\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":56976,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49566\/revisions\/56976"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=49566"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=49566"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=49566"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}