Scholarship ad in Urdu does not mean it intended for one community alone: Delhi High Court
The High Court hearing a slew of appeals filed by the; Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) opposing a ruling of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in a Hamdard Foundation case.
The Delhi High Court ruled that just because a scholarship advertising was published in Urdu, it cannot be assumed that it was only meant for students from a certain group [Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) Delhi VS Hamdard National Foundation (India)].
The statement made by a Division Bench of Justices Manmohan and Dinesh Kumar Sharma while; dealing with a batch of appeals filed by; the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) contesting a judgement of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
According to the appeals, a common point of law arose as a result of the tribunal’s judgement allowing the assessee’s (Hamdard Foundation) appeal despite the fact that it had paid the majority of the scholarship money to students of a certain religious group. This, according to the court, was a clear breach of Section 13(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act of 1961.
The appellant further claimed that; the Foundation’s advertisement for educational scholarships only published in Urdu, and in one publication. This, it said, plainly suggested that; the Foundation wished to limit the distribution of the scholarship advertisement since its goal to benefit only a specific religious community.
The High Court, on the other hand, stated that; a review of the paper-book indicated that; both the Commissioner Income Tax (Appeal) and the tribunal made a concurrent conclusion that; the benefit of the scholarship to poor and needy students not limited to students from a certain group.
According to the Bench, an assessment of the list supplied by the Hamdard Foundation revealed that the award benefitted students from all groups without prejudice.
“Moreover, simply because; an advertising published in Urdu, and only in one newspaper, it cannot be assumed that; it exclusively directed at students from a certain group.” In fact, in the assessment year 2010-11, a similar decision of CIT(A) accepted by the revenue and not even contested before the Tribunal,” the Court stated.
As a result, the appeals dismissed by the court, which noted that; no substantive point of law arose in them.
While the commissioner of income tax represented by; Senior Standing Counsel Abhishek Maratha, the Hamdard Foundation represented by Senior Advocate Salil Aggarwal, along with attorneys Madhur Aggarwal and Uma Shankar.
Read more email@example.com