Madras High Court
M/S.Frp Institute vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax on 4 January, 2021
TCA.No.526 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.1.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
and
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
Tax Case Appeal No.526 of 2018
M/s.FRP Institute, Chennai-97 ...Appellant
Vs
The Commissioner of Income Tax
(Exemptions), Chennai ...Respondent
APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against
the order dated 20.3.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai made in I.T.A.No.1385/Mds/2015
for the assessment year 2011-12.
For Appellant: Mr.T.Vasudevan
For Respondent: Mr.J.Narayanaswamy, SSC
Judgment was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J
This appeal has been filed by the assessee under Section 260A of
the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity) challenging the order
dated 20.3.2017 made in I.T.A.No.1385/Mds/2015 on the file of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.526 of 2018
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, 'C' Bench ('the Tribunal' for
brevity) for the assessment year 2011-12.
2. The appeal was admitted on 19.12.2018 on the following
substantial questions of law:
“i. Whether the Tribunal was right in
denying the exemption under Section 11 of the
Act on the ground that the assessee existed
not for charitable purpose within the meaning
of Section 2(15) of the Act ?
ii. Whether the Tribunal was right in
denying the exemption under Section 11
merely because there was surplus of income
over expenditure ?
iii. Whether the Tribunal is right in law in
holding that there is no educational activity by
the assessee without taking into consideration
that the assessee imparts education and
training in the field of fibre reinforced plastics
to various institutions and industry? And
iv. Whether the Tribunal was right in
concluding that the assessee is engaged in
trade and commerce and comes within the
Fourth Proviso to Section 2(15) without
adverting to the predominant nature of activity
of the assessee ?”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.526 of 2018
3. We have heard Mr.T.Vasudevan, learned counsel appearing for
the appellant/assessee and Mr.J.Narayanaswamy, learned Senior
Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent/Revenue.
4. The learned counsel on behalf of the appellant/assessee
submits that the appellant/assessee already filed the declaration/
undertaking under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme on 30.12.2020 and is
awaiting orders to be passed in Form No.3.
5. In the light of the subsequent event, the Competent Authority
shall process the application/declaration in accordance with the Direct
Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3 of 2020) and pass appropriate
orders as expeditiously as possible. The assessee is given liberty to
restore this appeal in the event the ultimate decision to be taken on
the declaration filed by the assessee under Section 4 of the said Act is
not in favour of the assessee. If such a prayer is made, the Registry
shall entertain the prayer without insisting upon any application to be
filed for condonation of delay in restoration of the appeal and on such
request made by the assessee by filing a miscellaneous petition for
restoration, the Registry shall place such petition before the
appropriate Division Bench for orders.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
TCA.No.526 of 2018
T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J
AND
R.N.MANJULA,J
RS
6. The tax case appeal stands disposed of with the
aforementioned liberty. Consequently, the substantial questions of law
framed are left open. No costs.
04.1.2021
To
1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Chennai.
2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chennai.
TCA.No.526 of 2018
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
