M/s H.P. State Environment Protection and Pollution Control Board, Shimla V. ACIT, Shimla

ITA 197/CHANDI/2015

• Counselvise Citation: 19721514 RSA 2015
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-09-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 10-09-2015
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 24-02-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAVI SARANGA L
• Assessee Lawyers: AJAY KUMAR CAS; RAJINDER PRASA D
• Keywords: Charitable institution
• Section: 2; 11; 143(3); 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH,CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS.RANO JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 197/CHD/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06 M/S H.P.STATE ENVIRONMENT VS THE ACIT, PROTECTION & POLLUTION CIRCLE, CONTROL BOARD, SHIMLA. PHASE 3, NEW SHIMLA. PAN: AAALH0191B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI RAJINDER PRASA D & SHRI AJAY KUMAR, CAS RESPONDENT BY : SHRI RAVI SARANGAL DATE OF HEARING : 10.09.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16.09.2015 O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI,JM THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORD ER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS) SHIMLA DATED 29.12.2014 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL) IS AGAINST THE APPLICABLE LAWS AND CANONS OF NATURAL J USTICE. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS WRONGLY ENHANCED THE INCOME BY RS. 1,48,32,691/- BY RAISING AN ISSUE WHICH WAS NOT SUB JECT MATTER OF APPEAL BEFORE HIM/HER. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS WRONG LY ENHANCED THE INCOME FROM RS. 6,12,11,694.00 TO RS. 7,60,44,385. 00 BY DISALLOWING THE EXEMPTION FOR ACCUMULATION U/S LL(L)(A) TO EXTE NT OF 15% OF INCOME WHICH WAS ALLOWED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER MERELY O N THE GROUND THAT EVEN FOR CLAIMING THE BENEFIT OF ACCUMULATION TO TH E EXTENT OF 15% U/S 2 11 (L)(A), 85% OF THE RECEIPT SHOULD HAVE BEEN EXPE NDED ON THE STATED CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES OR SHOULD HAVE SUB MITTED VALID FORM 10 WITHIN STIPULATED TIME AND INVESTMENT IN SPECIFI ED MANNER. THE APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION LL(L)(A) A ND 11(2) HAS BEEN WRONGLY INTERMINGLED WHEREAS THE PROVISIONS OF THES E SECTIONS ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE AND ARE TO BE APPLIED INDEPENDEN T OF EACH OTHER. THE CONDITIONS FOR CLAIMING BENEFIT OF ACCUMULATION U/S 11(2), WHICH ARE FOR OVER & ABOVE 15% ACCUMULATION U/S LL(L)(A), NAMELY FILING OF FORM 10 AND INVESTMENT IN SPECIFIED MANNER, CAN'T BE IMPOSE D FOR ACCUMULATION TO THE EXTENT OF 15% U/S 1 L(L)(A). 3. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT IN THIS CASE WAS COMPLETED VIDE ORDER PA SSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT ON 20.11.2007 AT RS .6.12 CR AS AGAINST RETURNED INCOME NIL SHOWN BY THE AS SESSEE. THE ADDITION WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT ASSESSEE HAD NOT APPLIED ITS INCOME FOR THE PURPOSE OF IT WAS CONSTITUTED. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) UPHELD THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESS ING OFFICER CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT ASSESSEE HAD NOT UTILIZED 85% OF TOTAL RECEIPTS DURING THE YEAR. ON FURTHER APPEAL TO ITAT, THE MATTER WAS REMANDED BACK TO THE ASSESS ING OFFICER FOR FRESH ASSESSMENT. CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT ASSESSEE HAD NEITHER APPLIED 85% OF ITS INCOME TOWA RDS OBJECTS FOR WHICH IT WAS CONSTITUTED, NOR GIVEN REQ UISITE NOTICE IN STATUTORY FORM NO. 10 AS PER PROVISIONS O F SECTION 11(2) READ WITH RULE 17 FOR ACCUMULATION OF SURPLUS IN TIME, THE SURPLUS INCOME OF RS. 6.12 CR WAS HELD BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO BE INCOME OF THE A SSESSEE VIDE ORDER UNDER SECTION 143(3)/254 DATED 23.12.201 1. 3 4. THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(APPEALS ) AND LD. CIT(APPEALS) CONSIDERED THE FACT THAT EXCESS OF INCOME OVER EXPENDITURE WAS RS. 7.60 CR INSTEAD OF ASSESSE D INCOME BY ASSESSEE OF RS. 6.12 CR ON ACCOUNT OF THE FACT THAT THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT SPENT 85% OF THE RECEIPT, STILL AUTOMATIC EXEMPTION OF 15% OF THE RE CEIPTS WERE BEING AVAILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE NOTICE OF ENHANCEMENT WAS GIVEN TO ASSESSEE AND AFTER CONSIDE RING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, LD. CIT(APPEALS) F OUND THAT PRIMARY CONDITION FOR CLAIMING EXEMPTION EVEN FOR ACCUMULATION OF 15% OF INCOME IS THAT 85% OF THE RE CEIPTS SHOULD BE EXPENDED ON THE STATED CHARITABLE OR RELI GIOUS PURPOSES OR SHOULD HAVE SUBMITTED FORM NO. 10 AND INVESTED IN THE SPECIFIED MANNER. THE ADDITION WAS , THEREFORE, ENHANCED FROM RS. 6.12 CR TO RS. 7.60 CR DISALLOWING THE ASSESSEE'S CLAIM OF BENEFIT OF 15% UNDER SECTION 11(1) AND FOR 85% UNDER SECTION 11(2) OF TH E INCOME TAX ACT. 5. THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL CHALLENGING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,48,32,691/- ON ACCOUNT OF ADDITION ENHANCED B Y THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) DISALLOWING THE CLAIM OF BENEFIT O F 15%. 6. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE OF GRANT OF DEDUCTION FOR 15% HAS BEEN CONSID ERED BY ITAT CHANDIGARH BENCH IN THE CASE OF THE SAME ASSESSEE IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 AND 2008-09 IN ITA 814 & 815 OF 2014 VIDE ORDER DATED 15.07.2015 AND C LAIM 4 OF ASSESSEE OF 15% HAS BEEN ALLOWED. THE FINDINGS OF THE TRIBUNAL IN PARA 9 TO 10 OF THIS ORDER ARE REPRODUC ED AS UNDER : 9. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE, IN TH E LIGHT OF ORDER OF ITAT CHANDIGARH BENCH IN THE CASE OF BHART IYA VIDYA MANDIR TRUST (SUPRA), WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE IS COV ERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE ABOVE ORDER IN WHICH THE TRIBUNAL IN PARA 13 TO 15 HELD AS UNDER : 13. IN THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL, THE REVENUE CHALLE NGED THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) IN ALLOWING CRED IT FOR 15% OF THE GROSS RECEIPTS IN WORKING THE SHORT FALL OF THE AMOUNTS SPENT WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT FULFILLED THE REQUI REMENTS BY GIVING A NOTICE UNDER SECTION 11(2)(A) OF THE INCOM E TAX ACT FOR ACCUMULATION OF INCOME INTENDED TO BE APPLIED F OR CHARITABLE PURPOSES IN FUTURE YEARS. 14. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESS ING OFFICER BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) AGAINST TH E DENIAL OF CREDIT FOR 15% OF THE GROSS RECEIPTS I.E. AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,47,80,028/-. THE FACTS ARE SAME AS NOTED ABO VE WHILE DISPOSING OF THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 11 OF THE ACT, IF A CHARITABLE TRUST INCURRED 85% OF ITS INCOME F OR THE OBJECTIVES OF THE TRUST, THE BALANCE 15% IS FREE TO BE SET APART/ACCUMULATED WITHOUT ANY CONDITIONS AND NOTHIN G IS TAXABLE. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT AS PER SECT ION 11 OF THE ACT, A CHARITABLE INSTITUTION IS NOT CHARGED TO TAX TO THE EXTENT OF 15% OF ITS INCOME AND RELIED UPON THE DEC ISION OF THE HON'BLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF ADDL.CIT VS. A.L .N. RAO CHARITABLE TRUST, 216 ITR 697. IT WAS SUBMITTED T HAT FROM THE ABOVE JUDGMENT, IT IS CLEAR THAT AN AMOUNT UPTO 15% OF THE INCOME IS EXEMPT FROM INCOME TAX AND CAN BE ACCUMUL ATED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER REITERATED THE FACTS STATED I N THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) FOLLO WING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 11 OF THE ACT AND THE JUDGMEN T OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF A.L.N. RAO C HARITABLE TRUST (SUPRA) DIRECTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ELIGIBL E FOR EXEMPTION OF 15% OF THE GROSS RECEIPTS AND ALLOWED THIS GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. THE FINDING OF THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) IN PARAS 5.5 TO 5.12 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER : 5.5 I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSI ONS. IT IS SEEN FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT THE APPELLANT VIDE H IS SUBMISSIONS DATED 28.12.2012 HAD CLAIMED THAT THERE IS A BLANKET EXEM PTION OF 15% OF THE TOTAL INCOME FROM THE UNSPENT AMOUNT OF THE TRUST. IN THIS REGARD, THE APPELLANT HAD RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF THE HON'B LE SUPREME COURT IN 5 THE CASE OF A.L.N. RAO CHARITABLE TRUST REPORTED IN 216 ITR 697. THE AO DID NOT DISCUSS THIS ISSUE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WHIL E REJECTING THE APPELLANT'S CLAIM. DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE APPELLANT ONCE AGAIN REFERRED TO THE PROVISION OF SECTION 11 OF THE INCO ME TAX ACT AND REITERATED HIS RELIANCE ON THE CASE OF A.L.N. RAO CHARITABLE T RUST(SUPRA). THE APPELLANT ONCE AGAIN CLAIMED THAT THERE IS BLANKET EXEMPTION OF 15% OF TOTAL INCOME FROM THE UNSPENT AMOUNT FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES OUT OF THE INCOME OF THE TRUST FOR THAT PREVIOUS YEAR. THE AO IN HIS COUNTER COMMENTS DATED 30.08.2013 MERELY MENTIONED THAT THE DETAILS HAD ALREADY BEEN CONSIDERED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AT PAGE-11. NO SUBMISSIONS WERE GIVEN BY THE AO AS TO WHY THIS CASE IS NOT APPLICAB LE IN THE APPELLANT'S CASE. THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF A.L.N. RAO CHARITABLE TRUST HAS HELD AS UNDER:- 'A MERE LOOK AT SECTION 11(1) (A) AS IT STOOD AT TH E RELEVANT TIME CLEARLY SHOWS THAT OUT OF THE TOTAL INCOME ACCRUING TO A TR UST IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR FROM PROPERTY HELD BY IT WHOLLY FOR CHARITABLE OR R ELIGIOUS PURPOSES, TO THE EXTENT THE INCOME IS APPLIED FOR SUCH RELIGIOUS OR CHARITABLE PURPOSES, THE SAME WILL GET OUT OF THE TAX NET BUT SO FAR AS THE INCOME WHICH IS NOT SO APPLIED DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR IS CONCERNED AT LE AST 25 PER CENT, OF SUCH INCOME OR RS. 10,000, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER, WILL BE PERMITTED TO BE ACCUMULATED FOR CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS PURPOSE AND IT WILL ALSO GET EXEMPTED FROM THE TAX NET. THEN FOLLOWS SUB-SECTION (2) WHICH SEEKS TO LIFT THE RESTRICTION OR THE CEILING IMPOSED ON SUCH EXEM PTED ACCUMULATED INCOME DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR AND ALSO BRINGS SUC H FURTHER ACCUMULATED INCOME OUT OF THE TAX NET IF THE CONDITIONS LAID DO WN BY SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 11 ARE FULFILLED MEANING THEREBY THE MONEY SO ACCUMULATED IS SET APART TO BE INVESTED IN THE GOVE RNMENT SECURITIES, ETC., AS LAID DOWN BY CLAUSE (B) OF SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 11 APART FROM THE PROCEDURE LAID DOWN BY CLAUSE (A) OF SECTI ON 11(2) BEING FOLLOWED BY THE ASSESSEE-TRUST. TO HIGHLIGHT THIS P OINT WE MAY TAKE AN ILLUSTRATION. IF RS. 1,00,000 ARE EARNED AS THE TOT AL INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR BY THE TRUST FROM PROPERTY HELD BY IT WHOLLY FOR CHARITABLE AND RELIGIOUS PURPOSES AND IF RS. 20,000 ARE ACTUAL LY APPLIED DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR BY THE SAID TRUST TO SUCH CHARITA BLE OR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES THE INCOME OF RS.20,000 WILL GET EXEMPTED FROM BEING CONSIDERED FOR THE PURPOSE OF INCOME-TAX UNDER THE FIRST PART OF SECTION 11(1). SO FAR AS THE REMAINING RS. 80,000 ARE CONCE RNED IF THEY COULD NOT BE ACTUALLY APPLIED FOR SUCH RELIGIOUS OR CHARITABL E PURPOSES DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR THEN AS PER SECTION 11 (1) (A) AT LEAST 25 PER CENT, OF SUCH TOTAL INCOME FROM PROPERTY OR RS. 10,000, WHIC HEVER IS HIGHER, WILL ALSO EARN EXEMPTION FROM BEING CONSIDERED AS INCOME FOR THE PURPOSE OF 6 INCOME-TAX, THAT IS, RS. 25,000 WILL THUS GET EXCLU DED FROM THE TAX NET. THUS OUT OF THE TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 1,00,000 WHICH HAS ACCRUED TO THE TRUST RS. 25,000 WILL EARN EXEMPTION FROM PAYMENT O F INCOME-TAX AS PER SECTION 11(1) (A), SECOND PART. THEN FOLLOWS SUB-SE CTION (2) WHICH STATES THAT THE CEILING OR THE LIMIT OR THE RESTRICTION OF ACCUMULATION OF INCOME TO THE EXTENT OF 25 PER CENT, OF THE INCOME OR RS. 10,000, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER, FOR EARNING INCOME-TAX EXEMPTION AS ENGRAFT ED UNDER SECTION 11(1) (A) WILL GET LIFTED IF THE MONEY SO ACCUMULAT ED IS INVESTED AS LAID DOWN BY SECTION LL(2)(B) MEANING THEREBY, OUT OF TH E TOTAL ACCUMULATED INCOME OF RS. 80,000 ACCRUING DURING TH E PREVIOUS YEAR AND WHICH COULD NOT BE SPENT FOR CHARITABLE OR RELI GIOUS PURPOSES BY THE TRUST, THE BALANCE OF RS. 55,000 IF INVESTED AS LAI D DOWN BY SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 11 WILL ALSO GET EXCLUDED FROM THE T AX NET. BUT FOR SUCH INVESTMENT AND IF SECTION 11(1) ALONE HAD APPLIED R S. 55,000 BEING THE BALANCE OF THE ACCUMULATED INCOME WOULD HAVE BEEN C OVERED BY THE TAX NET. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE REVENUE SUBMITTED THAT THE INVESTMENT AS CONTEMPLATED BY SUB-SECTION (2)(B) OF SECTION 11 MUST BE INVESTMENT OF ALL THE ACCUMULATED INCOME IN GOVERNM ENT SECURITIES, ETC., NAMELY, 100 PER CENT OF THE ACCUMULATED INCOME AND NOT ONLY 75 PER CENT, THEREOF. AND IF THAT IS NOT DONE, THEN ONLY T HE INVESTED ACCUMULATED INCOME TO THE EXTENT OF 75 PER CENT, WI LL GET EXCLUDED FROM INCOME-TAX ASSESSMENT. BUT SO FAR AS THE REMAINING 25 PER CENT, OF THE ACCUMULATED INCOME IS CONCERNED, IT WILL NOT EARN S UCH EXEMPTION. IT IS DIFFICULT TO APPRECIATE THIS CONTENTION. THE REASON IS OBVIOUS. SECTION 11, SUBSECTION (L)(A) OPERATES ON ITS OWN. BY ITS OPERATION TWO TYPES OF INCOME EARNED BY THE TRUST DURING THE PREV IOUS YEAR FROM ITS PROPERTIES ARE GIVEN EXEMPTION FROM INCOME-TAX: (I) THAT PART OF THE INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR WH ICH IS ACTUALLY SPENT FOR CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES IN THAT YEAR; AND II) OUT OF THE UNSPENT ACCUMULATED INCOME OF THE PR EVIOUS YEAR 25 PER CENT, OF SUCH TOTAL PROPERTY INCOME OR RS. 10,000, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER, CAN BE PERMITTED TO BE ACCUMULATED BY THE TRUST, EA RMARKED FOR SUCH CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES. SUCH 25 PER CENT, OF THE INCOME OR RS. 10,000, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER, WILL ALSO GET EXEMPTED FROM INCOME-TAX. THAT EXHAUSTS THE OPERATION OF SECTION 11(1) (A). THEN F OLLOWS SUB-SECTION (2) WHICH NATURALLY DEALS WITH THE QUESTION OF INVESTME NT OF THE BALANCE OF ACCUMULATED INCOME WHICH HAS STILL NOT EARNED EXEMP TION UNDER SUBSECTION (L)(A). SO FAR AS THAT BALANCE OF THE AC CUMULATED INCOME IS CONCERNED, THAT ALSO CAN EARN EXEMPTION FROM INCOME -TAX MEANING THEREBY THE CEILING OR THE LIMIT OF EXEMPTION OF AC CUMULATED INCOME FROM INCOME-TAX AS IMPOSED BY SUBSECTION (I) (A) OF SECT ION 11 WOULD GET 7 LIFTED IF ADDITIONAL ACCUMULATED INCOME BEYOND 25 P ER CENT, OR RS. 10,000, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER, AS THE CASE MAY BE, IS INVESTED AS LAID DOWN BY SECTION 11(2) AFTER FOLLOWING THE PROCEDURE LAID DOWN THEREIN. THEREFORE, SUB-SECTION (2) ONLY WILL HAVE TO OPERAT E QUA THE BALANCE OF 75 PER CENT, OF THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR OR INCOME BEYOND RS. 10,000, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER, WHICH HAS NOT GOT THE BENEFIT OF TAX EXEMPTION UNDER SUBSECTION (L)(A) OF SECTION 11. IF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE REVENUE IS RIGHT AND IF 100 PER CENT, OF THE ACCUMU LATED INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR IS TO BE INVESTED UNDER SUB-SECTION ( 2) OF SECTION 11 TO GET EXEMPTION FROM INCOME-TAX, THEN THE CEILING OF 25 P ER CENT, OR RS. 10,000, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER, WHICH IS AVAILABLE FOR ACCUMULATION OF INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR FOR THE TRUST TO EARN E XEMPTION FROM INCOME- TAX AS LAID DOWN BY SECTION 11(1) (A) WOULD BE REND ERED REDUNDANT AND THE SAID EXEMPTION PROVISION WOULD BECOME OTIOSE. IT HA S TO BE KEPT IN VIEW THAT OUT OF THE ACCUMULATED INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR AN AMOUNT OF RS. 10,000 OR 25 PER CENT, OF THE TOTAL INCOME FROM PRO PERTY, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER, IS GIVEN EXEMPTION FROM INCOME-TAX BY SECTI ON 11(1) (A) ITSELF. THAT EXEMPTION IS UNFETTERED AND NOT SUBJECT TO ANY CONDITIONS. IN OTHER WORDS, IT IS AN ABSOLUTE EXEMPTION. IF SUB SECTION (2) IS SO READ AS SUGGESTED BY LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE REVENUE, WHAT IS AN ABSOLUTE AND UNFETTERED EXEMPTION OF ACCUMULATED INCOME AS GUARA NTEED BY SECTION 11(1) (A) WOULD BECOME A RESTRICTED EXEMPTION AS LA ID DOWN BY SECTION 11(2). SECTION 11(2) DOES NOT OPERATE TO WHITTLE DO WN OR TO CUT ACROSS THE EXEMPTION PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 11(1) (A) SO FAR AS SUCH ACCUMULATED INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR IS CONCERNE D. IT HAS ALSO TO BE APPRECIATED THAT SUBSECTION (2) OF SECTION 11 DOES NOT CONTAIN ANY NON OBSTANTE CLAUSE LIKE ' NOTWITHSTANDING THE PROVISIO NS OF SUB-SECTION (1) '. CONSEQUENTLY, IT MUST BE HELD THAT AFTER SECTION 11 (1) (A) HAS FULL PLAY AND IF STILL ANY ACCUMULATED INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEA R IS LEFT TO BE DEALT WITH, AND TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE PURPOSE OF INCOM E-TAX EXEMPTION, SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 11 CAN BE PRESSED INTO S ERVICE AND IF IT IS COMPLIED WITH THEN SUCH ADDITIONAL ACCUMULATED INCO ME BEYOND 25 PER CENT, OR RS. 10,000, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER, CAN ALSO EARN EXEMPTION FROM INCOME-TAX ON COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LAID D OWN BY SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 11. IT IS TRUE THAT SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 11 HAS NOT CLEARLY MENTIONED THE EXTENT OF THE ACCUMULATED INCOME WHIC H IS TO BE INVESTED. BUT ON A CONJOINT READING OF THE AFORESAID TWO PROV ISIONS OF SECTIONS 11(1) AND 11(2), THIS IS THE ONLY RESULT WHICH CAN FOLLOW. IT IS ALSO TO BE KEPT IN VIEW THAT UNDER THE EARLIER INCOME-TAX ACT OF 1922, EXEMPTION WAS AVAILABLE TO CHARITABLE TRUSTS WITHOUT ANY REST RICTION UPON THE ACCUMULATED INCOME. THERE WAS A CHANGE IN THIS RESP ECT UNDER THE PRESENT 8 ACT OF 1961. UNDER THE PRESENT ACT, ANY INCOME ACCU MULATED IN EXCESS OF 25 PER CENT, OR RS. 10,000, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER, IS TAXABLE UNDER SECTION 11(1) (A) OF THE ACT, UNLESS THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS REGARDING ACCUMULATION AS LAID DOWN IN SECTION 11(2) ARE COMPLIED WITH. IT IS CLEAR, THEREFORE, THAT IF THE ENTIRE INCOME RECEIVED BY A TRUST IS SPENT F OR CHARITABLE PURPOSES IN INDIA, THEN IT WILL NOT BE TAXABLE, BUT IF THERE IS A SAVING, THAT IS TO SAY, AN ACCUMULATION OF 25 PER CENT, OR RS. 10,000, WHICHEV ER IS HIGHER, IT WILL NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE TAXABLE INCOME. SECTION 11(2) QU OTED ABOVE FURTHER LIBERALIZES AND ENLARGES THE EXEMPTION. A COMBINED READING OF BOTH THE PROVISIONS QUOTED ABOVE WOULD CLEARLY SHOW THAT SEC TION 11(2), WHILE ENLARGING THE SCOPE OF EXEMPTION, REMOVES THE RESTR ICTION IMPOSED BY SECTION 11(1) (A), BUT IT DOES NOT TAKE AWAY THE EX EMPTION ALLOWED BY SECTION 11(1) (A). ON THE EXPRESS LANGUAGE OF SECTI ONS 11(1) AND 11(2) AS THEY STOOD ON THE STATUTE BOOK AT THE RELEVANT TIME , NO OTHER VIEW IS POSSIBLE. IN THE LIGHT OF THE AFORESAID DISCUSSION AND KEEPIN G IN VIEW THE ILLUSTRATION WHICH WE HAVE GIVEN EARLIER, THE COMBINED OPERATION OF SECTION 11(1) (A) AND SECTION 11(2) AS APPLICABLE AT THE RELEVANT TIME WO ULD YIELD THE FOLLOWING RESULT: (I) IF THE INCOME DERIVED FROM PROPERTY HELD UNDER TRUST WHOLLY FOR CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES DURING THE PREVIOU S YEAR IS RS. 1,00,000 AND IF RS. 20,000 THEREFROM ARE ACTUALLY APPLIED TO SUCH PURPOSES IN INDIA THEN THOSE RS. 20,000 WILL GET EXEMPTED FROM PAYMEN T OF INCOME-TAX AS PER THE FIRST PART OF SECTION LL(L)(A). (II) OUT OF THE REMAINING ACCUMULATED INCOME OF RS. 80,000 FOR THE PREVIOUS YEAR, A FURTHER SUM OF RS. 25,000 WILL GET EXEMPTED FROM PAYMENT OF INCOME-TAX AS PER THE SECOND PART OF SEC TION 11(1) (A). THUS, OUT OF THE TOTAL INCOME DERIVED FROM PROPERTY AS AF ORESAID DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR, THAT IS, RS. 1,00,000, RS. 45,000 IN ALL WILL GET EXCLUDED FROM THE TAX NET ON A COMBINED OPERATION OF THE FIR ST AND THE SECOND PART OF SECTION 11(1) (A). (III) THE AFORESAID CEILING OF RS. 25,000 OF THE AC CUMULATED INCOME FROM PROPERTY OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR, WILL GET LIFTED UNDE R SECTION 11(2) TO THE EXTENT THE BALANCE OF SUCH ACCUMULATED INCOME IS IN VESTED AS LAID DOWN BY SECTION 11(2). TO TAKE AN ILLUSTRATION IF, SAY, AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF RS. 20,000 OUT OF THE BALANCE OF ACCUMULATED INCOME OF RS. 55,000 IS INVESTED AS PER SECTION 11(2), THEN THIS ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF RS. 20,000 OF ACCUMULATED INCOME WILL GET EXCLUDED FROM THE TA X NET AS PER SECTION 11 (2). 9 (IV) THE REMAINING BALANCE OF THE ACCUMULATED INCOM E OUT OF RS. 55,000, THAT IS, RS. 35,000 IF NOT INVESTED AS PER SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 11, WILL BE ADDED TO THE TAXABLE INCOME OF THE TRUS T AND WILL NOT GET EXEMPTED FROM THE TAX NET. (V) IF, ON THE OTHER HAND, THE ENTIRE REMAINING ACC UMULATED INCOME OF RS. 55,000 IS WHOLLY INVESTED AS PER SECTION 11 (2), TH E SAID ENTIRE AMOUNT OF RS. 55,000 WILL GET EXEMPTED FROM THE TAX NET. ' 5.7 THIS DECISION OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT CLEA RLY HELD THAT THERE IS A BLANKET EXEMPTION WITH REGARD TO THE 25% (NOW 15%) OF GROSS RECEIPTS AS PER SECOND PART OF SECTION LL(L)(A) OF THE INCOME TAX A CT. THIS EXEMPTION OF 25% IS NOT DEPENDENT ON ANY OTHER CONDITION EXCEPT THAT THE TR UST OR SOCIETY SHOULD BE REGISTERED U/S 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. THE ONLY ISSUE TO BE EXAMINED HERE IS WHETHER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 11(1) (A) AND 11( 2) HAVE BEEN SINCE AMENDED AND IF SO, WHETHER THE AFORESAID DECISION WOULD APP LY TO THE AMENDED PROVISIONS ALSO? 5.8 THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION LL(L)(A) AND 11 (2) A S THEY WERE IN FORCE IN THE YEAR 1968-69 RELEVANT TO AY 69-70, I.E THE YEAR TO WHICH THE CASE OF A.L.N. RAO CHARITABLE TRUST (SUPRA) RELATES HAVE BEEN REPR ODUCED IN THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT ITSELF AS UNDER: 'THESE PROVISIONS AS THEY STOOD AT THE RELEVANT TIM E READ AS UNDER: '11. (1) SUBJECT TO-THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 60 T O 63, THE FOLLOWING INCOME SHALL NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE PR EVIOUS YEAR OF THE PERSON IN RECEIPT OF THE INCOME (A) INCOME DERIVED FROM PROPERTY HELD UNDER TRUST W HOLLY FOR CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES TO THE EXTENT TO WHICH SUCH I NCOME IS APPLIED TO SUCH PURPOSES IN INDIA ; AND, WHERE ANY SUCH INCOME IS A CCUMULATED FOR APPLICATION TO SUCH PURPOSES IN INDIA, TO THE EXTEN T TO WHICH THE INCOME SO ACCUMULATED IS NOT IN EXCESS OF TWENTY-FIVE PER CENT, OF THE INCOME FROM THE PROPERTY OR RUPEES TEN THOUSAND, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER,... (2) WHERE THE PERSONS IN RECEIPT OF THE INCOME HAVE COMPLIED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, THE RESTRICTION SPECIFIED IN CLAUSE (A) OR CLAUSE (B) OF SUB-SECTION (1) AS RESPECTS ACCUMULATION OR SETTING APART SHALL NOT APPLY FOR THE PERIOD DURING WHICH THE SAID CONDITIONS REMAIN COMPLIED WITH (A) SUCH PERSONS HAVE, BY NOTICE IN WRITING GIVEN T O THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER IN THE 'PRESCRIBED MANNER, SPECIFIED THE PURPOSE FOR W HICH THE INCOME IS 10 BEING ACCUMULATED OR SET APART AND THE PERIOD FOR W HICH THE INCOME IS TO BE ACCUMULATED OR SET APART, WHICH SHALL IN NO CASE EX CEED TEN YEARS. (B) THE MONEY SO ACCUMULATED OR SET APART IS INVEST ED IN ANY GOVERNMENT SECURITY AS DEFINED IN CLAUSE (2) OF SECTION 2 OF T HE PUBLIC DEBT ACT, 1944 (18 OF 1944), OR IN ANY OTHER SECURITY WHICH MAY BE APPROVED BY THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT IN THIS BEHALF.' 5.9 THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION LL(L)(A) AND 11 (2) A S THEY WERE IN FORCE IN THE YEAR 2009-2010, I.E THE YEAR TO WHICH THE PRESE NT CASE RELATES ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER: '11. INCOME FROM PROPERTY HELD FOR CHARITABLE OR RE LIGIOUS PURPOSES. (1) SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 60 TO 63, THE FOLLOWING INCOME SHALL NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE PR EVIOUS YEAR OF THE PERSON IN RECEIPT OF THE INCOME- (A) INCOME DERIVED FROM PROPERTY HELD UNDER TRUST W HOLLY FOR CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES, TO THE EXTENT TO WHICH SUCH INCOME IS APPLIED TO SUCH PURPOSES IN INDIA; AND, WHERE ANY SUCH INCOME IS ACCUMULATED OR SET APART FOR APPLICATION TO SUCH PURPOSES IN INDIA , TO THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE INCOME SO ACCUMULATED OR SET APART IS NOT IN EXCESS OF FIFTEEN PER CENT OF THE INCOME FROM SUCH PROPERTY; (2) WHERE EIGHTY-FIVE PER CENT, OF THE INCOME REFER RED TO IN CLAUSE (A) OR CLAUSE (B) OF SUB-SECTION (1) READ WITH THE EXPLANA TION TO THAT SUBSECTION IS NOT APPLIED, OR IS NOT DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN APPLI ED, TO CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES IN INDIA DURING THE PREVIOUS YEA R BUT IS ACCUMULATED OR SET APART, EITHER IN WHOLE OR IN PART, FOR APPLICAT ION TO SUCH PURPOSES IN INDIA, SUCH INCOME SO ACCUMULATED OR SET APART SHAL L NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR OF THE PERSON IN RECEIPT OF THE INCOME, PROVIDED THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE COMPL IED WITH, NAMELY (A) SUCH PERSON SPECIFIES, BY NOTICE IN WRITING GIV EN TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE PRESCRIBED MANNER, THE PURPOSE FOR W HICH THE INCOME IS BEING ACCUMULATED OR SET APART AND THE PERIOD FOR W HICH THE INCOME IS TO BE ACCUMULATED OR SET APART, WHICH SHALL IN NO CASE EXCEED TEN YEARS; (B) THE MONEY SO ACCUMULATED OR SET APART IS INVEST ED OR DEPOSITED IN THE FORMS OR MODES SPECIFIED IN SUB-SECTION (5): PROVIDED THAT IN COMPUTING THE PERIOD OF TEN YEARS REFERRED TO IN CLAUSE (A), THE PERIOD DURING WHICH THE INCOME COULD NOT B E APPLIED FOR THE 11 PURPOSE FOR WHICH IT IS SO ACCUMULATED OR SET APART , DUE TO AN ORDER OR INJUNCTION OF ANY COURT, SHALL BE EXCLUDED: PROVIDED FURTHER THAT IN RESPECT OF ANY INCOME ACCU MULATED OR SET APART ON AFTER THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2001, THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SUB-SECTION SHALL HAVE EFFECT AS IF FOR THE WORDS 'TEN YEARS ' AT BOTH THE PLACES WHERE THEY OCCUR, THE WORDS 'FIVE YEARS ' HAD BEEN SUBSTI TUTED. 5.10 IT IS APPARENT FROM THE READING OF PROVISIONS REFERRED TO ABOVE THAT SECTION11 (A) WAS ALMOST IDENTICAL DURING THE AY 69 -70 AND DURING AY 20010-11. AS REGARDS THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 11( 2) ARE CONCERNED, EVEN THE AMENDED SUB SECTION (2) OPERATES QUA THE BALANC E OF 85 PER CENT, OF THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR WHICH HAS NOT GOT THE BENEFIT OF TAX EXEMPTION UNDER SUB- SECTION(L)(A) OF SECTION 11. SECTION 11(2), AS AMEN DED, DOES NOT OPERATE TO WHITTLE DOWN OR TO CUT ACROSS THE EXEMPTION PROVISI ONS CONTAINED IN SECTION LL(L)(A)SO FAR AS SUCH ACCUMULATED INCOME OF THE PR EVIOUS YEAR IS CONCERNED. AS HELD BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF A.L.N. RAO CHARITABLE TRUST (SUPRA),IT HAS TO BE APPRECIATED T HAT SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 11 DOES NOT CONTAIN ANY NON OBSTANTE CLAU SE LIKE 'NOTWITHSTANDING THE PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTION(1)'.CONSEQUENTLY, I T MUST BE HELD THAT AFTER SECTION LL(L)(A) HAS FULL PLAY AND IF STILL ANY ACC UMULATED INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR IS LEFT TO BE DEALT WITH, AND TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE PURPOSE OF INCOME-TAX EXEMPTION, SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 11 CAN BE PRE SSED INTO SERVICE AND IF IT IS COMPLIED WITH THEN SUCH ADDITIONAL ACCUMULATED I NCOME BEYOND 15 PER CENT, CAN ALSO EARN EXEMPTION FROM INCOME-TAX ON CO MPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN BY SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 11. 5.11 IT MAY ALSO BE RELEVANT TO REFER TO THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY 'CHATURVEDI AND PITHISARIA' ON THIS ISSUE. THESE VIEWS READ AS UNDER: 'SECTION 11 HAS UNDERGONE AMENDMENTS MORE THAN ONCE . IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO BETTER GRASP THE PROVISIONS AS APPLICABLE F ROM TIME TO TIME, IT WILL BE BETTER TO PUT THE EFFECT OF SUCH PROVISIONS , EXCEPT THOSE OF SUB- SECTION (1A) DEALT SEPARATELY HEREUNDER, VIS-A-VIS EXEMPTION AND TAXABILITY OF INCOME DERIVED FROM PROPERTY HELD UND ER CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS TRUST, IN A TABULAR FORM SUBJECT-WISE. TH US:- INCOME DERIVED FROM PROPERTY HELD UNDER TRUST OF OT HER LEGAL OBLIGATION WHOLLY FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES AND SUCH INCOME OR PART THEREOF IS NOT APPLIED TO SUCH PURPOSES IN IND IA DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR WHEREIN IT IS DERIVED, BUT IS ACCUMUL ATED FOR APPLICATION TO SUCH PURPOSES IN INDIA: - 12 1 2 3 4 1922 ACT PROVISIONS 1961 ACT PROVISIONS APPLICABLE FOR AY 1962-63 TO 1970-71 1961 ACT PROVISIONS APPLICABLE FOR AY 1971-72 TO 1975-76 1961 ACT PROVISIONS APPLICABLE FROM 1976 ONWARDS UNCONDITIONALLY EXEMPT {S.4(3)(I)}. CONDITIONALLY EXEMPTION - (A) IF A NOTICE IN FROM NO. 10 IS GIVEN TO THE 1TO IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE 17 AND INCOME SO ACCUMULATED {MINUS ACCUMULATION PERMITTED UNDER (B), BELOW} IS INVESTED IN GOVERNMENT SECURITIES, OR OTHER APPROVED SECURITIES, THE ACCUMULATION UP TO A PERIOD OF TEN YEARS IS EXEMPT [S. LL(L)(A), LATTER PART, READ WITH S. 11(2)}; AND (B) IF CONDITIONS AT (A) ARE NOT FULFILLED, ACCUMULATION TO THE EXTENT OF 25 PER CENT OF THE INCOME FROM THE PROPERTY OR RS. 10,000/- WHICHEVER IS HIGHER, IS EXEMPT. IN COMPUTING THE 25 PER CENT., THE INCOME FROM SUCH PROPERTY FOR THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR OR THE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING PREVIOUS YEAR, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER, MAY BE TAKEN [S. 11(1) (A), LATTER PART, READ WITH THE EXPLANATION]. _____________ CONDITIONALLY EXEMPT - (A) IF A NOTICE IN FORM NO. 10 IS GIVEN TO THE 1TO IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE 17 AND INCOME SO ACCUMULATED ACCUMULATION PERMITTED UNDER (B), BELOW] IS INVESTED IN THE GOVERNMENT SECURITIES OR OTHER APPROVED SECURITIES OR IS DEPOSITED IN POST OFFICE SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNTS OR UNDER THE POST OFFICER (TIME DEPOSITS) RULES, 1970, OR IN A BANKING COMPANY TO WHICH THE BANKING REGULATION ACT, 1949, APPLIES OR CO- OPERATIVE LAND MORTGAGE BANK OR A COOPERATIVE LAND DEVELOPMENT BANK, OR DEPOSITED IN AN ACCOUNT WITH AN APPROVED FINANCIAL CORPORATION, THE ACCUMULATION UP TO A PERIOD OF TEN YEARS IS EXEMPT [S. 11(2)]. [(B) NO SUCH EXEMPTION]. CONDITIONALLY EXEMPT - (A) SAME AS IN COL. (3), FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 1976-77 TO 1982- 83. FOR AND FROM ASSESSMENT YEAR 1983-84, INVESTMENT OR DEPOSIT IS TO BE MADE IN THE FORMS OR MODES SPECIFIED IN SECTION 11(5). (B) IF CONDITIONS AT (A) ARE NOT FULFILLED, ACCUMULATION TO THE EXTENT OF 25% ONLY IS EXEMPT. IN COMPUTING THE 25%, ANY VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS REFERRED TO IN S. 12 SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE PART OF THE INCOME [S. 11(1)(A), LATTER PART READ WITH EXPL. (1)]. 5.12 AS SUCH, THIS JUDGEMENT OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IS SQUARELY APPLICABLE TO THE APPELLANT'S CASE. THE AP PELLANT IS THUS ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION OF 15% OF GROSS RECEIPTS I.E. 15% OF RS.9 ,85,33,522/- U/S LL(L)(A) OF 13 THE INCOME TAX ACT. THE AO IS ACCORDINGLY DIRECTED TO ALLOW THIS EXEMPTION OF 15% OF THE GROSS RECEIPTS AMOUNTING TO RS.1,47,80,0 28/-. THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. 15. AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THIS GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) ON PROPER APPRECIATION OF FAC TS IN THE LIGHT OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 11 OF THE ACT AN D THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE O F A.L.N. RAO CHARITABLE TRUST (SUPRA) RIGHTLY DECIDED THE IS SUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ISSUE IS COVERED IN F AVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COU RT NOTED ABOVE IN THE FINDINGS OF THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS). THE LEARNED D.R FOR THE REVENUE DID NOT CONTRIBUTE MUCH ON THIS ISSUE AND MERELY RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE ASSES SING OFFICER WITHOUT POINTING OUT ANY INFIRMITY IN THE O RDER OF THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) IN ALLOWING THE EXEMPTION OF 15% ON THE GROSS RECEIPTS. THUS WE DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTI FICATION TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) . THIS GROUND OF DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS ACCORDINGLY DISMIS SED. 10. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DECISIONS IN THE CASE OF B HARTIYA VIDYA MANDIR TRUST (SUPRA) WE SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW AND DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ALLOW BENEFIT OF 15% ACCUMULATION AMOUNTING TO RS. 2,61,8 6,197/- AS PER LAW. 11. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D. 7. THE LD. DR ALSO STATED THAT ISSUE IS COVERED BY THE ORDER OF ITAT CHANDIGARH BENCH DATED 15.07.2015. 8. CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF T HE SUBMISSIONS OF PARTIES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT ISS UE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY ORDER OF ITAT CHANDIGARH BENCH IN THE CASE OF SAME ASSESSEE FOR SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007-08, 2008-09 ORDER DATED 15.07.2015 (SUPRA). BY FOLLOWING THE REASONS FOR DECISION IN THIS ORDER, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF 14 AUTHORITIES BELOW AND DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ALLOW BENEFIT OF 15% ACCUMULATION AS PER LAW AND DELETE T HE ADDITION OF RS. 1,48,32,699/-. 9. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (RANO JAIN) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 16 TH SEPTEMBER,2015. POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT, DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT CHANDIGARH