Asst.Director of Income Tax (Exemptions)-I, Hyderabad V. Ravi Rishi Education Society, Hyderabad

ITA 1587/HYD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 69905 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-11-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 16-10-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D SUDHAKAR RAO
• Assessee Lawyers: S RAMA RAO
• Section: 12A; 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1587/HYD/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10) ASSTT . DIRECTOR OF INCOME - TAX(EXEMPTION) I, HYDERABAD V/S M/S. RAVI RISHI EDUCATION SOCIETY, HYDERABAD (PAN AAAAR 1952 M) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) CROSS OBJECTION NO.164/HYD/2012 ITA NO.1587/HYD/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10) M/S. RAVI RISHI EDUCATION SOCIETY, HYDERABAD (PAN AAAAR 1952 M) V/S ASSTT. DIRECTOR OF INCOME - TAX(EXEMPTION) I, HYDERABAD (CROSS OBJECTOR) (APPELLANT - IN - APPEAL) REVENUE BY : SHRI D.SUDHAKAR RAO, DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.RAMA RAO DATE OF HEARING 7.11.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 7.11.2013 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: TH IS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE AND CROSS - OBJECTION ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX(APPEALS) IV, HYDERABAD DATED 31.7.2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10. 2. GRO U NDS OF THE REVENUE IN ITS APPEAL READ AS FOLL O W S - 1. THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS BOTH ON F A CTS AND IN LAW. 2. THE LEARNED. CIT(A) ERRED IN HOL D IN G THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ELIGIBLE FOR CLAIM OF EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11, EVEN IN ABSENCE OF APPROVAL UNDER SUB - CLAUSE (VI ) O F TH E SECTION 10(23C). ITA LNO.1587/HYD.2012 & CO THEREIN M/S. RAVI RISHI EDUCATION SOCIETY, HYDERABAD 2 3. THE LEARNED. CIT(A), OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THE FACT THAT AP PROVAL UN DER SUB - CLAUSE (VI) TO THE SECTION 10(23C) IS DISTINCT FROM REGISTRATION U/S. 12A OF THE ACT. 4. THE LD. CIT(A) FAILED TO SEE THAT SUB - CLAUSE (VI) TO TH E SECTION 10(23C) AS INSERTED BY THE F IN A N C E ACT , 1998 W. E .F 01.04.1999, STATES TH A T THE UNI V ERSITY OF OTHER E D UCA T IONAL IN S TIT U TION EXISTING SOLELY FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSE, AND WHI C H MAY B E APPROVED BY THE PR E SCRIBED AUTHORITY. THE ISSUE IS EXPLICITLY D E ALT WITH BY THE ACT ITSELF AND THE IN T EN T ION OF THE LEGISLATURE IS QUITE CLEAR FROM IT. 5. THE LEARN ED. CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE DECISION OF THE APEX C OUR T IN TH E CA S E OF CIT VS. BAR COUNCIL O F M AHARASH T RA WAS MADE IN THE YEAR 1981 PRIOR TO INTRODUCTION OF THE SUB - CLAUSE (VI)OF THE SECTION 10923C) (INSERTED BY THE FINANCE ACT, 1998 W.E.F. 01 .04.1999). 6. THE LEARNED. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THE FACT THAT OBTAINING APPROVAL O F TH E PRESCRIBED AUTHO R I T Y IS MANDATORY AS PER THE PLAIN MEANING OF SECTION 10(23C)( VI ) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961, WHEREVER THE AGGREGATE GROSS RECEIPTS OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS ARE OVER AND ABOVE RS.1.00 CRORES. 7. . 3. GROUNDS OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITS CROSS - OBJECTION READ AS FOLLO W S - 1. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX(APPEA LS) OUGHT TO HAVE SEEN THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTED THE EXEMPTION U/S. 11 OF THE I.T. ACT AS THE RESPONDENT HEREIN DID NOT OBTAIN NECESSARY APPROVAL U/S. 10(23C) OF THE I.T. ACT. 2. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX(APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE SEEN THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT RAISE ANY ISSUE WITH REGARD THE COLLECTION OF ANY AMOUNT IN ADDITION TO THE FEES NORMALLY CHARGEABLE AS HE WAS SATISFIED THAT NO SUCH DONATIONS WERE COLLECTED. 3. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX(APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE SEEN THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING EXAMINED THE CASE OF THE RESPONDENT HEREIN HAS ARRIVED AT THE CONCLUSION THAT ALL OTHER REQUIREMENTS WERE SATISFIED AND THAT THE EXEMPTION U/S. 11 IS NOT AVAILABLE ONLY BECAUSE THE RESPONDENT DID NOT OBTAIN THE N ECESSARY APPROVAL U/S. 10(23C)OF THE I.T.ACT. 4. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX(APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE DIRECTED WITHOUT ANY FURTHER VERIFICATION AS THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ALLOW EXEMPTION U/S. 11 WITHOUT ANY FURTHER VERIFICATION AS THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALREADY VERIFIED THE REQUIRED PARTICULARS BEFORE PASSING THE ORDER REGULAR ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 5. . 4. A FTE R HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES, WE FIND THAT THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL O F THE REVENUE AND THE CROSS - O B J E CTION OF THE ASSESSEE A R E COVERED BY THE DECIS I ON OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 13.4.2011 IN ASSESSEES OWN CA S ES FOR TH E ASSESSMENT YEAR S 2005 - 06 TO 2006 - 07 (IN ITA LNO.1587/HYD.2012 & CO THEREIN M/S. RAVI RISHI EDUCATION SOCIETY, HYDERABAD 3 ITA NOS.1289 TO 1297/HYD/2010, EXCEPT ITA NO.1292/HYD/2010 OF THE REVENUE AND CROSS - OBJ E CTION NOS.99 TO 106/HYD/2010 THEREIN OF THE ASSESSEE). SIN C E THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS IN CONSONANCE WITH THE ABOVE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 13.4.2011, A COPY OF WHICH IS ALSO PLACED BEFORE US, WE UPHOLD THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND REJECT THE G R OUND S OF THE REVENUE IN ITS APPEAL AS WELL AS THE GROUNDS O F THE ASSESSEE IN ITS CROSS - OBJECTION. 5. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES APPEAL AS WELL AS ASSESSEES CROSS - OBJECTION ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT AT THE CONCLUSION OF HEARING ON 7.11.2013 SD/ - SD/ - ( SAKTIJIT DEY ) (CHANDRA POOJARI ) JUDICIAL MEMBER. ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. D T/ - 7 TH NOVEMBER, 2013 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. M/S. RAVI RISHI EDUCATION SOCIETY, C/O. SHRI S.RAMA RAO, FLAT NO.102, SHIRYA'S ELEGANCE, NO.3 - 6 - 643, STREET NO.9, HIMAYATNAGAR, HYDERABAD 500029 2. ASSTT. DIRECTOR OF INCOME - TAX(EXEMPTION) I, HYDERABAD 3. 4. 5. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX(APPEALS) IV HYDERABAD COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX III, HYDERABAD DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ITAT HYDERABAD B.V.S.