Community Development Centre, Theni V. ITO Ward 1(1), Theni

ITA 1375/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5307 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-10-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 25-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR ADD L
• Assessee Lawyers: G BASKAR
• Keywords: Tax effect
• Section: 80G; 12A

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI , !' . , $ % SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER './ ITA NOS.1374 & 1375/CHNY/2018 !' / ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTRE, MAIN ROAD, NEAR GHAT ROAD, GENGUVARPATTI, THENI DISTRICT 625 203 PAN : AAATC 4440 Q V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD I (1), 74/74A, WHITE HOUSE STREET, N.R.T. NAGAR, THENI-625 531. ()/ APPELLANT) (*+)/ RESPONDENT) ) , - / APPELLANT BY: SHRI G. BASKAR, ADVOCATE *+) , - / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI R. CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR, A DDL.CIT . ! , /$ / DATE OF HEARING : 22.10.2018 01' , /$ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22.10.2018 / O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: I.T.A. NOS.1374 & 1375/CHNY/2018 ARE THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-2, MADURAI IN ITA NO.0022/2013-14 DATED 1 5.03.2018 AND ITA NO.0224/2014-15 DATED 15.03.2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2010-11 AND 2011-12 RESPECTIVELY. 2 I.T.A. NOS.1374 & 1375/CHNY/18 2. SHRI G. BASKAR, ADVOCATE, REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI R. CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR, ADDL.CIT, REPRESE NTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 3. AS THE ISSUES IN THESE APPEALS ARE IDENTICAL, TH E APPEALS ARE DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER. 4. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. A.R. THAT THE ASSESS EE WAS ORIGINALLY ENJOYING THE BENEFIT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'). IT WAS SUBMITTED T HAT SUBSEQUENTLY THE LD. CIT HAD WITHDRAWN THE REGISTRATION GRANTED UNDER SE CTION 12A OF THE ACT BY INVOKING PROVISIONS OF SECTION 12AA(3) OF THE AC T VIDE ORDER DATED 06.12.2010. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE SAME WAS UNDER CHALLENGE IN APPEALS AND THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 23 RD SEPTEMBER, 2013 IN I.T.A. NOS.2207 & 1998(MDS)/2010 HAD RESTORED THE BENEFIT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A AND SECTION 80G OF THE ACT. IT W AS A SUBMISSION THAT THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL WAS THE SUBJECT MATTER OF APPEALS BY THE REVENUE BEFORE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS IN TAX CASE APPEAL NOS.370 & 371 OF 2014 WHICH WERE DISMISSED BY AN OR DER DATED 29.01.2016 ON ACCOUNT OF TAX EFFECT. IT WAS A SUBM ISSION THAT THE A.O. WHILE PASSING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2010-11 DID NOT HAVE THE BENEFIT OF THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL GRAN TING THE ASSESSEE THE BENEFIT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE AC T AND FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12, THE A.O. THOUGH HAD THE BE NEFIT OF THE ORDER OF 3 I.T.A. NOS.1374 & 1375/CHNY/18 THIS TRIBUNAL, HAD TAKEN THE STAND THAT THE REVENUE WAS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AND CONSEQUEN TLY HAD NOT GRANTED THE BENEFIT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF TH E ACT. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. A.R. THAT HE HAD NO OBJECTION IF THE ISS UE WAS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF A.O. FOR RE-ADJUDICATION AFTER CONSIDERING THE BENEFIT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT AS GRANTED BY THIS TRI BUNAL. 5. IN REPLY, THE LD. D.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE DIRECT IONS GIVEN BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ITS ORDER WHILE GRANTING REGISTRATION U NDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT WAS LIABLE TO BE CONSIDERED. HE VEHEMENTLY SUP PORTED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) AND ORDER OF THE A.O. 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. ADMIT TEDLY, THE ISSUE OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT NOW ST ANDS RESTORED IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TR IBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE WHICH HAS ALSO BEEN UPHELD BY THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT ON ACCOUNT OF WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL BY THE REV ENUE ON ACCOUNT OF TAX EFFECT. THIS BEING SO, AS THE A.O. HAS NOT CON SIDERED THE RAMIFICATION OF THE DIRECTIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITS ORDER GRAN TING THE ASSESSEE THE BENEFIT OF SECTION 12A OF THE ACT, THE ISSUES IN TH ESE APPEALS ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. FOR RE-ADJUDICATIO N AFTER CONSIDERING THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL GRANTING THE ASSESSEE THE BE NEFIT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT. 4 I.T.A. NOS.1374 & 1375/CHNY/18 7. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22 ND OCTOBER, 2018 AT CHENNAI. SD/ SD/- ( . ) ( ) (S. JAYARAMAN) (GEORGE MATHAN) $ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 3' /DATED, THE 22 ND OCTOBER, 2018. KRI. 4 , */56 76'/ /COPY TO: 1. )/ APPELLANT 2. *+) / RESPONDENT 3. . 8/ () /CIT(A)-2, MADURAI 4. . 8/ /CIT (EXEMPTION), CHENNAI 5. 6!9: */ /DR 6. :; < /GF.