DCIT, Hisar V. Om Savitri Jindal Charitable Society, Hisar

ITA 1192/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0118 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-03-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 11-03-2011
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 17-03-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PEEYUSH SONK
• Keywords: Charitable institution
• Section: 12AA; 2; 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH E NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV AND SHRI B.C. MEENA I.T.A. NO.1192/DEL/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 DEPUTY CIT, VS. OM SAVTRI JINDAL CHARITABLE HISAR. SOCIETY, JINDAL HOUSE, (HARYANA) MODEL TOWN, HISAR. (PAN: AAATO1462C) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI PEEYUSH SONK AR, SR.DR RESPONDENT BY: SHRI ASHWANI KUMAR, CA ORDER PER RAJPAL YADAV: JUDICIAL MEMBER THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AGAINST THE ORDE R OF LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) DATED 13.1.2010 PASSED FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. GROUND NO.2 TAKEN BY THE REVENUE IS GENERAL IN N ATURE AND IT DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY SPECIFIC FINDING TO BE RECORDED. GROUND NO.1 IS THE ONLY SUBSTANTIAL GROUND OF APPEAL WHICH PROJECTS THE GRI EVANCE OF THE REVENUE AS UNDER: WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) WAS RIGHT IN DIRECTING THE ASS ESSING OFFICER TO CONSIDER THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED EARLIER I.E. BEFO RE GRANT OF REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, AS APPLIED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES WITHIN THE MEANING OF SEC. 11 O F THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, AS APPLIED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES WITHI N THE MEANING OF 2 SEC. 11 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, WITHOUT APPREC IATING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS GRANTED REGISTRATION ONLY ON 13.3. 2006. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E HAS FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 20.10.2006 DECLARING A LOSS OF RS.91,17,7 88. AN ASSESSMENT ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED ON 29.12.2008 WHEREIN INCOME OF TH E ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DETERMINED AT RS.3,79,500. THE ASSESSEE TRUST HAD C OME INTO AN EXISTENCE ON 13.3.2006. IT HAS APPLIED FOR REGISTRATION UNDER SE CTION 12AA OF THE INCOME- TAX ACT, 1961 ON 3.4.2006. THE LEARNED CIT, HISSAR HAS GRANTED REGISTRATION W.E.F. 3.4.2006 VIDE ORDER DATED 12.6.2006. ASSESSI NG OFFICER DID NOT GRANT THE BENEFIT OF SECTION 11 OF THE ACT TO THE ASSESSE E, BECAUSE THE REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA WAS NOT THERE PRIOR TO 31.3.2006 . THE ASSESSEE APPEARS TO HAVE APPLIED TO THE LEARNED CIT AND PRAYED THAT REGISTRATION OUGHT TO BE GRANTED FROM THE DATE OF CREATION OF THE TRUST, EVE N THOUGH APPLICATION FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION HAS BEEN FILED SUBSEQUENTLY, BUT IT WAS FILED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF ONE YEAR PRESCRIBED IN SEC. 12AA OF THE A CT. LEARNED CIT HAD ISSUED A CORRIGENDUM VIDE ORDER DATED 15/16.1.2009. LEARNED CIT HAD GRANTED THE REGISTRATION W.E.F. 13.3.2006 I.E. THE DATE ON WHICH THE TRUST HAS BEEN CREATED. LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS OBSERVED THA T IN VIEW OF THIS CHANGE IN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, ASSESSEE WOULD B E ENTITLED TO EXEMPTION 3 UNDER SEC. 11 OF THE ACT. HE DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ALLOW SUCH BENEFIT TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. LEARNED DR HAS POINTED OUT THAT LEARNED CIT(APPE ALS) HAS FAILED TO CONSIDER HOW THE ASSESSEE HAS INCURRED THE EXPENDIT URE OF MORE THAN RS. 90 LACS WITHIN A SHORT SPAN OF MARCH 2006. ON THE OTHE R HAND, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) HAS SIMPLY DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO GRANT THE BENEFIT OF SECTION 11 OF THE ACT. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT DOUBTED THE GENUINENESS O F THE INCURRENCE OF EXPENSES. HE HAS DISALLOWED THE CLAIM BECAUSE REGIS TRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA WAS NOT AVAILABLE. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND GON E THROUGH THE RECORD CAREFULLY. THE ISSUE BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT( APPEALS) WAS A LIMITED ONE I.E. WHETHER ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO BENEFIT UN DER SECTION 11 OR NOT. SINCE THE REGISTRATION HAS BEEN GRANTED W.E.F. 13.3.2006 BY ISSUANCE OF A CORRIGENDUM, MEANING THEREBY, ASSESSEE WOULD BE ENT ITLED TO THE BENEFIT OF SECTION 11 OF THE ACT. THE QUANTIFICATION OF SUCH B ENEFIT IS NOT WITHIN THE REALM OF LEARNED CIT(APPEALS). IT LIES WITH THE ASS ESSING OFFICER. LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS SIMPLY OBSERVED THAT IN VIEW OF THE CORRIGENDUM DATED 15/16.1.2009, THE ASSESSEE IS ENT ITLED TO EXEMPTION UNDER 4 SECTION 11 OF THE ACT AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO ALLOW THE SAME. AFTER GRANT OF REGISTRATION FOR THE ACCOUNTING PERI OD RELEVANT TO THE THIS ASSESSMENT YEAR, THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE HAS TO BE COMPUTED AFRESH AT THE END OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THERE IS NO ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS). ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENU E IS DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMI SSED. DECISION PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18.03.2011 ( B.C. MEENA ) ( RAJ PAL YADAV ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 18/03/2011 MOHAN LAL COPY FORWARDED TO: 1) APPELLANT 2) RESPONDENT 3) CIT 4) CIT(APPEALS) 5) DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR