ITO (Exemptions) Ward 2 , CHENNAI V. The All India Skin & Hide Tanners and Merchants Association , CHENNAI

ITA 1851/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6028 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 31-07-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S VIDYA
• Assessee Lawyers: B SAGADEVAN
• Section: 143(3); 12AA; 12; 11

Judgement Text

, .. , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , SMC C BENCH, CHENNAI . , BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NOS.1851/MDS/2017 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14) THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), WARD-2, CHENNAI 600 034. VS THE ALL INDIA SKIN & HIDE TANNERS AND MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION, 43, RAJA MUTHIA ROAD, PERIAMET, CHENNAI 600 003. PAN: AAATA0492J ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SMT. S. VIDYA, FCA /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI B. SAGADEVAN, JCIT /DATE OF HEARING : 05.10.2017 ! /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06 .10.2017 / O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEA LS)-17, CHENNAI DATED 31.03.2017 IN ITA NO.261/CIT(A)-17/15 -16 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 PASSED U/S.250(6) R.W.S.143 (3) OF THE ACT. 2. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED SEVERAL GROUNDS IN ITS APPEAL, HOWEVER THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE IS THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED BY HOLDING THAT THE APPELLANT IS ENTITLED TO EXEMPTION U/S.11 & 12 OF THE ACT. 2 ITA NO.1851/MDS/2017 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E IS A TRADE ASSOCIATION REGISTERED AS CHARITABLE SOCIETY REGIST ERED U/S. 12AA OF THE ACT, ENGAGED IN THE ACTIVITY OF IMPORTING & DISTRIBUTING WATTLE EXTRACT TO THE MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY, FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 ON 30.09.201 3 DECLARING LOSS OF RS.16,61,848/-. THE CASE WAS SEL ECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND FINALLY ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS PASSED U/ S. 143(3) OF THE ACT ON 30.12.2015, WHEREIN THE LD.AO WITHDREW T HE BENEFIT OF SECTION 11 & 12 OF THE ACT. 4. HOWEVER ON APPEAL, THE LD.CIT(A) HELD THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY FOLLOWING THE ORDERS OF THE CHEN NAI BENCHES OF THE TRIBUNAL BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- 6.1.1 THE ITAT, 'A' BENCH, CHENNAI (ITA NO.1751/MDS/2013) HAD ADJUDICATED THE ISSUE REGARDI NG GRANT OF EXEMPTION U/S 11 IN THE APPELLANT'S OWN CASE FOR THE ASST YEAR 2009-10. IN THEIR ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 6.6.2014 , THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL STATED THAT THEY WERE OF THE VIEW THAT THE APPELLANT WAS ENTITLED FOR EXEMPTION U/S. 11 AND 12 OF THE ACT. IT WAS ALSO STATED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS BEEN PERSI STENTLY HOLDING THAT THE APPELLANT SOCIETY FUNCTIONS UNDER THE CONCEPT OF MUTUALITY AND THAT THE ACTIVITIES EMBEDDED IN TH E MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION OF THE SOCIETY WERE CHARI TABLE. THEY DIRECTED THE REVENUE TO DELETE THE TAX IMPOSED ON THE APPELLANT BY WITHDRAWING THE BENEFIT U/S 11 & 12 OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE'S APPEAL WAS THEREBY ALLOWED. 3 ITA NO.1851/MDS/2017 6.1.2 IN THEIR ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 23.09.2016, THE HON'BLE ITAT, 'B' BENCH, CHENNAI (ITA NOS. 1240 TO 1242/MDS /2016) DISCUSSED AND ADJUDICATED THE SAME ISSUE IN THE APP ELLANT'S OWN CASE FOR THE ASST YEARS 2010-11 TO 2012-13. THE HON'BLE ITAT STATED THAT THEY DID NOT FIND IT NECESSARY TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDERS OF THE CIT(A) FOR ALL THE THREE RELEVANT ASST YEARS. IN HIS ORDER DT. 29.01.2016, THE CIT(A) HAD TAKEN I NTO CONSIDERATION THE ITAT'S JUDGEMENTS IN THE APPELLAN T'S OWN CASE FOR THE EARLIER ASST YEARS 1998-99, 1990-91, 1 991-92 AND 2009-10. HE HAD ALSO FOLLOWED THE RATIO OF THE HON' BLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS P.IYA NADAR CHARIT ABLE TRUST AND DIRECTED THE AD TO GIVE THE APPELLANT ITS ENTIT LED EXEMPTION AND ALSO TO DELETE THE TAX LEVIED U/S 11 AND 12 OF THE I T ACT FOR THE ASST YEAR 2012-13. 6.1.3 RESPECTFULLY ABIDING BY THE ORDER OF THE JURI SDICTIONAL ITAT PRONOUNCED ON 23.09.2016 CITED SUPRA, I HEREBY HOLD THAT THE APPELLANT IS ENTITLED TO EXEMPTION U/S 11 AND 12 OF THE I T ACT. THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS ALLOWED. 5. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD.AR SUBMITTED THAT THE CASE IS COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TR IBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR EARLIER YEARS ON THE SAME I SSUE, WHICH THE LD.CIT(A) HAS FOLLOWED. THEREFORE IT WAS PLEAD ED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) MAY BE SUSTAINED. THE LD.DR ON THE OTHER HAND VEHEMENTLY ARGUED IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDE R OF THE LD.AO. 4 ITA NO.1851/MDS/2017 6. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AFTER ANALYZING THE ISSUE, I FIND THAT THE CASE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECIS ION OF THE CHENNAI BENCHES OF THE TRIBUNAL FOR THE EARLIER ASS ESSMENT YEARS ON THE SAME ISSUE, AS POINTED OUT BY THE LD.A R AND IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE. THE LD.DR ALSO CONFIRMED THE FACT T HAT THE REVENUE HAS FILED THE APPEAL TO KEEP THE ISSUE ALIV E SINCE THEY HAVE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE HIGHER JUDICIAL FORU M. IN THIS SITUATION, I DO NOT FIND IT NECESSARY TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) BECAUSE HE HAS ONLY FOLLOWED THE DECI SION OF THE CHENNAI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE EARLIER YEARS ON THE IDENTICAL ISSUE. ACCORDIN GLY THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) IS SUSTAINED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 06 TH OCTOBER, 2017 AT CHENNAI. SD/- ( . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER '# /CHENNAI, $% /DATED 06 TH OCTOBER, 2017 RSR % '( )( /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. , ( )/CIT(A) 4. , /CIT 5. (-. / /DR 6. .0 /GF