Case Law Details
Ashwini Sahakari Rugnalaya & Res. Centre Vs CCIT & Ors. (Supreme Court)
The short question which arises for consideration is the claim of the appellant for benefit under Section 10 (23C) (via) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment years 1999-2000 to 2002- 2003. The benefits in terms of the section are available to any hospital existing solely for philanthropic purposes and not for purposes of profit.
We may note that this was the position which existed even earlier under Section 10 (22A) prior to the amended provision under the Finance (No.2) Act, 1998 with effect from 01.4.1999. The only change which was made was requiring it “may be approved by the prescribed authority”. It appears that the legislative intent of the same was that considering the experience over some years it may have been felt that some entities which were not entitled to it were availing of the benefit.
We say so aforesaid because one of the arguments of learned senior counsel for the appellant is that the appellant has been granted benefit for earlier ten years but then we put to learned counsel that the same cannot ipso facto entitle the appellant for the benefit in the relevant assessment years.
On perusal of the order passed by the Chief Commissioner, Income Tax- II, Pune, dated 31.3.2005, the exemption has been denied. The denial of the exemption has been upheld by the High Court in terms of the impugned judgment dated 05.12.2005.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
