CENTRE FOR SOCIO ECONOMIC ANDENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES,PADIVATTOM, KOCHI V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOCHI

ITA 201/COCH/2024

AI Insights

The case involves the Centre for Socio Economic and Environmental Studies, a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, which appealed against the denial of exemption under section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The AO had denied the exemption on the grounds that the appellant charged fees for services rendered, citing the proviso to section 2(15) of the Act. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, leading to the appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) and AO did not adequately discuss the factual and legal positions governing the issue, particularly in light of the Supreme Court's judgment in the Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority case, which could influence the outcome regarding the exemption under section 11.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 23419 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Other Referred Cases: ACIT v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority [2022] 449 ITR 1
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LEENA LAL
• Assessee Lawyers: MATHEW JOSEPH
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 143(3); 11

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM ITA No. 201/Coch/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Centre for Socio Economic and .......... Appellant Environmenal Studies Iind Floor, Khadi Federation Building N.H. Byepass, Padivattom, Kochi 682024 [PAN: AAAAC1878P] vs. The Income Tax Officer .......... Respondent Exemption Ward, Kochi Appellant by: Shri Mathew Joseph, CA Respondent by: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 17.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 23.01.2025 O R D E R This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 31.01.2024 for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act with the object of providing services to the Government of Kerala. The return of income for AY 2017-18 was filed disclosing Nil income after claiming exemption u/s. 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). 2 ITA No. 201/Coch/2024 Centre for Socio Economic and Environmenal Studies Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the by the Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Kochi (hereinafter called \"the AO\") vide order dated 17.12.2019 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act at a total income of Rs.18,23,020/- denying exemption u/s. 11 of the Act by placing reliance on the proviso to section 2(15) of the Act on the ground that the appellant is charging fees for the services rendered by it. 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order confirmed the action of the AO. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal. 5. It is submitted that merely because the appellant is charging fees for the services rendered by it, does not by itself attract proviso to section 2(15) of the Act. It is further submitted that in light of the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority [2022] 449 ITR 1 the matter be remanded. 6. On the other hand, the learned Sr. DR opposed the above submission. 7. I heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. The issue that arises for my consideration is whether the appellant trust is entitle for exemption 3 ITA No. 201/Coch/2024 Centre for Socio Economic and Environmenal Studies u/s. 11 of the Act. On perusal of the assessment order, it would appear that the AO had denied exemption u/s. 11 of the Act solely on the ground that the appellant trust was charging fees for the services rendered it placing reliance on the proviso to section 2(15) of the Act. The learned CIT(A) merely confirmed the action of the AO in toto without discussing the factual position of law as well as the law governing the issue at hand. I, therefore, set aside the impugned order of the CIT(A) and the assessment order and remand the matter to the file of the AO for fresh determination of the issue in the light of the observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (supra) . I will make it clear that all the contentions raised by the assessee before this Tribunal are left open to be considered by the AO at the time of passing the fresh assessment order. 8. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 23rd January, 2025. Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cochin, Dated: 23rd January, 2025 n.p. 4 ITA No. 201/Coch/2024 Centre for Socio Economic and Environmenal Studies Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The Pr. CIT concerned 4. The Sr. DR, ITAT, Cochin 5. Guard File By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Cochin "