DCIT (E), C-2, Chandigarh V. M/s Aggarwal Vidya Pracharni Sabha, Faridabad

ITA 207/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5173 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-10-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 25-09-2018
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 19-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Earning of tax free income; Non compliance
• Section: 143(3); 10B; 201; 208; 2; 11; 139

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BE NCH A, CHANDIGARH !, ' # , . %.. . & , '( # BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM & DR. B.R.R. KUMAR , A M ./ ITA NO. 207/CHD/2018 '* + ,+ / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 DCIT (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE-2, CHANDIGARH M/S AGGARWAL VIDYA PRACHARNI SABHA, TIGAON ROAD, BALLABGARH, FARIDABAD ./ PAN NO: AABTA3409Q / APPELLANT / RESPONDENT / ASSESSEE BY : NONE / REVENUE BY : SMT. CHANDRAKANTA ! ' # / DATE OF HEARING : 25/09/2018 $%&'() # / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04/10/2018 '-/ ORDER PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, A.M.: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE AG AINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), FARIDABAD DT. 13/12/2017. 2. IN THE PRESENT APPEAL REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOL LOWING GROUNDS: 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, TH E LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FINDINGS OF THE A.O. THAT T HERE IS A DISCREPANCY IN THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AS IN THE COMPUTATION IT HAS CLAIMED ACCUMULATION UNDER EXPLANATION 2 OF SECTION 11(1) AND IN THE AUDIT REP ORT THE SAME HAS BEEN CLAIMED U/S 11(2) OF THE IX ACT, 1961. 2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, TH E LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FINDING OF THE A.O. THAT TH E FIGURES OF ACCUMULATION ARE DIFFERENT IN FORM NO. 10B AT RS. 2,42,47,364.10 AS CERTIFIED BY THE AUDITOR WHEREAS IN FORM NO. 10 AMOUNT SHOWN WAS RS. 1,82,41,063/- WHIC H DEFEATS THE VERY PURPOSE OF FILING FORM NO. 10 I.E. TO HELP THE AO TO ARRIVE AT THE CORRECT INCOME. 3. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, TH E LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ACCEPTING AN UNDULY DELAYED FORM 10 WITH FIGURES AT VARIANCE WITH THAT IN THE AUDIT REPORT AND THEREBY NEGATING THE RATIONALE OF THE FORM INTENDED TO HELP THE A.O. ARRIVE AT EXEMPT INCOME. 4. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT NOT ONLY HAS THE ASSESSEE GIVEN DIFFERENT SECTIONS AND DIFFERENT FIGURES FOR CLAIMING ACCUMUL ATION BUT HAS ALSO GIVEN A VERY GENERAL PURPOSE FOR ACCUMULATION I.E.' PROVIDING TH E QUALITY EDUCATION TO THE STUDENTS OF OUR SOCIETY' IN CLEAR DEFIANCE OF STATU TORY PROVISIONS THAT PURPOSES OF ACCUMULATION HAVE TO BE SPECIFIC. 3. THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN IN THE COMPUTATION OF INC OME AMOUNT DEEMED TO BE APPLIED AS PER CLAUSE 2 OF EXPLANATION 2 SECT ION 11(1) OF I.T.ACT OF RS.1,82,41,063/-THE ASSESSEE WAS SPECIALLY ASKED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO FURNISH THE DETAILS OF THIS ACCUMULATION AS THE EXP LANATION 2 SECTION 11(1) PRESCRIBES ANY INCOME WHICH HAS NOT BEEN RECEIVED O R WHICH COULD NOT BE UTILIZED DUE TO ANY OTHER REASON IN THE PREVIOUS YE AR. THE ASSESSEE IN THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION SHOWED THIS AMOUNT AS ACCUMULATION OF IN COME AS PRESCRIBED U/S 11(2) OF I.T.ACT. THE FORM NO. 10 DATED 26.09.2014 HAS BEEN FILED IN SUPPORT. THE SPECIFIC PURPOSES HAVE BEEN SHOWN IN THE FORM 10 HA VE BEEN SHOWN AS:- (I) FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDING AT 12 ACRES OF LAN D AT MIRAPUR, PALWAL. (II) FOR PROVIDING THE QUALITY EDUCATION TO THE STUDENTS OF OUR SOCIETY. 4. THE COMPUTATION OF TOTAL INCOME HOWEVER SHOWED T HIS AMOUNT AS ACCUMULATED UNDER CLAUSE 2 OF THE EXPLANATION 2 OF SECTION 11(1) OF THE ACT WHILE THOUGH THE FORM NO. 10, THE SAME AMOUNT HAS S HOWN TO BE ACCUMULATED U/S 11(2) OF I.T.ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HELD TH AT AS PER PROVISIONS TO PROVISO 2 RULE 12(2) OF IT.RULES THE SUBMISSION IN FORM 10 WA S TO BE ELECTRONICALLY FILED / UPLOADED AFTER 01.04.2014. THE ASSESSEE FILED AN UP LOADED COPY OF FORM 10 WHICH HAS BEEN FILED ON 22.11.2016. THE AMOUNT OF A CCUMULATION HAS BEEN SHOWN AS RS.1,82,41,063/-. AMOUNT IN (RS.) GROUP A GROUP B TOTAL INCOME AP0PLIED FOR THE CHARITABLE PURPOSES DURING THE YEAR 9,91,90,886.70 9,27,36,166.00 19,19,26,313.00 INCOME ACCUMULATED TO ITS EXTENT IT DOES NOT EXCEED 15% OF THE TOTAL INCOME 2,17,83,097.30 92,98,969.00 3,70,88,367.00 ACCUMULATED INCOME IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVE UNDER SECTION 11(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 2,42,47,364.10 ------ 1,82,41,036.00 TOTAL INCOME 14,52,20,648.00 10,20,35,135.00 24,72, 55,782.00 THAT FORM. NO. 10B FILED ONLINE ALSO CONTAINS CONSOLIDATED FIGURES OF THE INSTITUTION AS STATED ABOVE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER COMPLETED ASSESSMENT AT AN IN COME OF RS. 1,82,41,063/- ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE FORM NO. 10 WAS NOT UPLOADED A ND NO RESOLUTION WAS PASSED REGARDING THE ACCUMULATION OF INCOME OF RS. 1,82,41,063/-. 5. THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION HOLDING AS U NDER: 10. THE LD. AR HAS PLEADED THAT THE FORM NO. 10B WAS DULY SIGNED BY THE AUDITORS OF THE COMPANY, WHO MUST HAD VERIFIED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND OTHER RELEVANT RECORDS OF THE APPELLANT BEFORE ISSUING TH IS AUDIT REPORT. THE APPELLANT, BY FILING THE ONLINE FORM NO. 10 WHICH IS STATEMENT TO BE FURNISHED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER/ PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY UNDER SUB-SECTION(2) OF SECTION 11 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 HAD INFORMED THE AO VIDE POINT NO 3 O F THE SAID FORM NO. 10, THAT THIS AMOUNT OF RS. 1,82,41,063/- WAS 'AGGARWAL VIDY A PRACHARNI SABHA HAD IN RESPECT OF AN ASSESSMENT YEAR PRECEDING THE RELEVAN T ASSESSMENT YEAR GIVEN THE STATEMENT REGARDING THE ACCUMULATION OR SETTING APA RT OF AN AMOUNT AS REQUIRED UNDER SUB-SECTION(2) OF SECTION 11 OF THE INCOME TA X ACT, 1961.' THE COPY OF THE SAID FORM NO 10 ALONG WITH OTHER DOCUMENTS HAVE BEE N ANNEXED IN THE PAPER BOOK. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U NDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ALSO, THE LD. AR HAS CLAIMED T HAT HE HAD HANDED OVER THE COPY OF THIS FORM NO. 10 TO THE AO. THIS FACT HAS A LSO BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE AO IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ITSELF. 11. IN THIS BACKGROUND, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE CO NTENTIONS OF THE APPELLANT ARE BEING EXAMINED. THUS, THERE ARE FOUR ISSUES THAT NEED TO BE ADJUDIC ATED. FIRSTLY, THERE IS A CONFUSION REGARDING THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT UNDER THE RELE VANT SECTION I.E. WHETHER THE APPELLANT HAS CLAIMED RELIEF U/S 11(1)2 OR U/S 11(2 ). THE CONFUSION IS ON ACCOUNT OF THE FACT THAT AS PER THE AO IN COMPUTATION THE APPE LLANT HAS CLAIMED U/S 11(1)(2) AND IN THE AUDIT REPORT U/S 11(2). 13. ON THIS ISSUE THE LD. AR HAS PLEADED THAT THE COMPUTATION OF TOTAL INCOME SHOWED THIS AMOUNT AS ACCUMULATED UNDER CLAUSE 2 OF THE EXPLANATION 2 OF SECTION 11(1) OF THE ACT, DOES NOT HAVE ANY RELEVAN CE BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT IN ALL THE RELEVANT FORMS I.E. IN FORM NO 10B, FORM NO 10, AND ITS SUBMISSIONS DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE APPELLANT HAS DECLARED THAT THIS WAS UNDER SECTION 11(2) OF THE ACT. THE LD. AR HAS PLEA DED THAT THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME IN WHICH THE APPELLANT HAS BY CLERICAL MISTA KE AND HAS SHOWN THIS UNDER SECTION 11(1)(2) OF THE ACT, WAS NOT FILED ANYWHERE AND WAS JUST FOR THE RECORDS OF THE ASSESSEE. I FIND MERITS IN THE SUBMISSIONS OF T HE APPELLANT AND THUS I FIND THAT ADDITION CANNOT BE MADE ON SOLELY THIS BASIS. 14* SECONDLY WHILE DISALLOWING THE CLAIM OF THE ASS ESSEE, THE AO HAS FURTHER STATED THAT ' AS PER PROVISIONS TO PROVISO 2 RULE 1 2(2) OF THE I.T. RULES THE SUBMISSION INFORM 10 WAS TO BE ELECTRONICALLY FILED/UPLOADED A FTER 01.04.2014. WHEN POINTED OUT, THE ASSESEE FILED AN UPLOADED COPY OF FORM 10 WHICH HAS BEEN FILED ON 22.11.2016. THE AMOUNT OF ACCUMULATION HAS BEEN SHO WN AS RS 1,82,41,063/-. 15. THIS IS THE MAIN PLANK ON WHICH THE ADDITION HA S BEEN MADE BY THE AO. CONSEQUENTLY, THIS ISSUE IS DISCUSSED IN GREATER DE TAIL BY ME IN THIS ORDER. AT THIS JUNCTURE IT SHALL BE PERTINENT TO EXAMINE THE PROVI SIONS OF LAW FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15, THE CONDITIONS SPECIFIED UNDER SECTIO N 11(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 WERE AS UNDER: WHERE EIGHTY FIVE PERCENT OF THE INCOME REFERRED T O IN CLAUSE(A) OR CLAUSE (B) OF SUB-SECTION (1) READ WITH THE EXPLANATION TO THAT S UBSECTION IS NOT APPLIED, OR IS NOT DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN APPLIED, CHARITABLE OR RELI GIOUS PURPOSES IN INDIA DURING THE PREVIOUS BUT IS ACCUMULATED OR SET APART , EITHER IN WHOLE OR IN PART, FOR APPLICATION TO SUCH PURPOSES IN INDIA, SUCH INCOME SO ACCUMULATED OR SET APART SHALL NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE PR EVIOUS YEAR OF THE PERSON IN RECEIPT OF THE INCOME, PROVIDED THE FOLLOWING CONDI TIONS ARE COMPLIED WITH NAMELY: (A) SUCH PERSON SPECIFIES , BY NOTICE IN WRITING GIVEN TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE PRESCRIBED MANNER, THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH THE INCOME IS BEING ACCUMULATED OR SET APART AND THE PERIOD FOR WHICH THE INCOME IS TO BE ACCUMULATED OR SET APART AND THE PERIOD FOR WHICH 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 INVESTED O R DEPOSITED IN THE FORMS OR MODES SPECIFIED IN SUB-SECTION (5) 16. UNDER PROVISO TO RULE 12(2) NOTICE WAS REQUI RED TO BE FURNISHED ELECTRONICALLY. 17. THE LD. AR HAS PLEADED THAT THESE CONDITIONS WE RE SATISFIED BY THE APPELLANT AND ALSO HAS BEEN ADMITTED BY THE AO IN HIS ASSESSM ENT ORDER. THE CONTENTION OF THE AO HAS BEEN THAT THE ONLINE FORM HAD TO BE FILE D BEFORE FILING THE RETURN AND NOT LATER. ON THIS ISSUE I FIND THAT THE TIME OF UP LOADING THE SAID NOTICE IN FORM NO 10 WAS SETTLED BY FINANCE ACT, 2015. THE SAID FINAN CE BILL STATED AS UNDER: 'IN ORDER TO REMOVE THE AMBIGUITY REGARDING THE PER IOD WITHIN WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS REQUIRED TO FILE FORM 10, AND TO ENSURE DUE COMP LIANCE OF THE ABOVE CONDITIONS WITHIN TIME, IT IS PROPOSED TO AMEND THE ACT TO PRO VIDE THAT THE SAID FORM SHALL BE FILED BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF FILING RETURN OF INCOM E SPECIFIED UNDER SECTION 139 OF THE ACT FOR THE FUND OR INSTITUTION. IN CASE THE FO RM 10 IS NOT SUBMITTED BEFORE THIS DATE, THEN THE BENEFIT OF ACCUMULATION WOULD NOT BE AVAILABLE AND SUCH INCOME WOULD BE TAXABLE AT THE APPLICABLE RATE. FURTHER, T HE BENEFIT OF ACCUMULATION WOULD ALSO NOT BE AVAILABLE IF RETURN OF INCOME IS NOT FURNISHED BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF FILING RETURN OF INCOME. THESE AMENDMENTS WILL TAKE EFFECT FROM 1 APRIL, 20 16 AND WILL, ACCORDINGLY, APPLY IN RELATION YE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 AND SUBSEQUE NT ASSESSMENT YEARS.' 18. FURTHER THE NOTE ON RELEVANT CLAUSES OF FINAN CE BILL 2015, STATES AS UNDER: 'CLAUSE 8 OF THE BILL SEEKS TO AMEND SECTION 11 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT RELATING TO INCOME FROM PROPERTY HELD FOR CHARITABLE OR RELIGIO US PURPOSES. SUB-SECTION (2) OF THE AFORESAID SECTION PROVIDES T HAT WHERE EIGHTY-FIVE PER CENT, OF THE INCOME IS NOT APPLIED, OR IS NOT DEEMED TO H AVE BEEN APPLIED, TO CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES IN INDIA DURING TH E PREVIOUS YEAR BUT IS ACCUMULATED OR SET APART, FOR APPLICATION TO SUCH P URPOSES IN INDIA, THEN, SUCH INCOME ACCUMULATED OR SET APART SHALL NOT BE INCLUD ED IN THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR OF THE PERSON IN RECEIPT OF THE INCOM E. HOWEVER, THE SAID EXEMPTION IS SUBJECT TO FULFILLMENT OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIO NS THAT: (I)SUCH PERSON SPECIFIES BY NOTICE IN WRITING IN FO RM 10, PRESCRIBED FOR SUCH PURPOSE, PROVIDING DETAILS OF THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH THE INCOME IS BEING ACCUMULATED OR SET APART AND THAT THE PERIOD FOR WH ICH THE INCOME IS TO BE ACCUMULATED OR SET APART DOES NOT EXCEED FIVE YEARS ; AND (II)THE MONEY SO ACCUMULATED OR SET APART IS INVESTED OR DEPOSITED I N THE FORMS OR MODES SPECIFIED IN SUB-SECTION (5) OF SECTION 11. WITH A VIEW TO AMEND THE CONDITIONS SPECIFIED IN SU B-SECTION (2) OF THE AFORESAID SECTION, IT IS PROPOSED TO INSERT A NEW CLAUSE TO P ROVIDE THAT THE STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN THE SAID CLAUSE (A) IS REQUIRED TO B E FURNISHED ON OR BEFORE THE DUE DATE SPECIFIED UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 139 BY FURNISHING THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE PREVIOUS YEAR. IT IS ALSO PROPOSED T O SUBSTITUTE THE EXISTING FIRST AND SECOND PROVISOS WITH A NEW PROVISO TO PROVIDE THAT IN COMPUTING THE PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS REFERRED TO IN THE SAID CLAUSE (A), THE PERIO D DURING WHICH THE INCOME COULD NOT BE APPLIED FOR THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH IT IS SO A CCUMULATED OR SET APART, DUE TO AN ORDER OR INJUNCTION OF ANY COURT, SHALL BE EXCLU DED. THIS AMENDMENT WILL TAKE EFFECT FROM 1ST APRIL, 201 6 AND ACCORDINGLY APPLY IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 AND SUBSEQU ENT YEARS.' 19. THUS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15, FILING OF THIS FORM NO 10 WAS MANDATORY, BUT THE DATE BEFORE WHICH IT HAD TO BE FILED WAS NO T SETTLED. IT IS ONLY FROM A.Y. 2016-17 THAT THE DATE OF FILING FORM NO. 10 WAS MAN DATED (I.E. AS PER THE DATES SPECIFIED U/S 139(1)) IN THE ACT W.E.F. 01.04.2016. THUS, IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, I FIND THAT THE APPELLANT HAD FULFILLED BOTH THE CONDITION S FOR GETTING THIS BENEFITS OF SECTION 11(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. IN THIS REGARD, I FIND SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING JUDGMENTS: IN CIT V. NAGPUR HOTEL OWNER'S ASSOCIATION, (2001) 114 TAXMAN 255 (SC) THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT HAS HELD THAT 'THE APPLICATIO N IN FORM 10 CAN BE FILED BEFORE THE COMPLETION OF THE ASSESSMENT'. IN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX V. SIMLA CHANDIGARH D IOCESE SOCIETY [2009] 318 ITR 96 (PUNJAB & HARYANA), IT WAS HELD 'IT WAS POIN TED OUT THAT THE APPELLANT HAS ACCORDINGLY MODIFIED FORM NO. 10 IN THE COURSE OF A SSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE MODIFIED FORM NO. 10 HAS ALSO BEEN REJECTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE GROUND THAT THERE IS NO PROVISION IN THE ACT FOR RE VISING FORM NO. 10. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO SPECIFIC BAR PROHIBITING THE APPELLANT FROM MODIFYING THE FIGURE OF ACCUMULATION. IN THE LIGHT OF THE RAT IO LAID DOWN BY THE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF SIT V. NAGPUR HOTEL OWNERS' AS SOCIATION [2001] 247 ITR 201, FORM 10 MAY BE FURNISHED BEFORE THE ASSESSING AUTHO RITY COMPLETES THE CONCERNED ASSESSMENT'. IN THE CASE OF ASSOCIATION OF CORPORATION & APEX SO CIETIES OF HANDLOOMS V. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LNCOME-TAX[2013] 30 TAXMANN.C OM 22 (DELHI), IT WAS HELD THAT, 'ON GOING THROUGH THE ABOVE EXTRACT WE FIND T HAT THE SUPREME COURT OBSERVED THAT IT WAS NECESSARY THAT THE ASSESSING A UTHORITY MUST HAVE THE INFORMATION UNDER FORM-10 AT THE TIME HE COMPLETES THE ASSESSMENT AND IN ITS ABSENCE IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR THE ASSESSING AUTHOR ITY TO GIVE BENEFIT OF SUCH EXCLUSION. FURTHERMORE, ONCE THE ASSESSMENT IS SO C OMPLETED IT WOULD BE FUTILE TO FIND FAULT WITH THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY FOR HAVING INCLUDED SUCH INCOME IN THE ASSESSABLE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE SUPREME COUR T HELD CATEGORICALLY THAT WITHOUT THE PARTICULARS OF THIS INCOME AS GIVEN IN FORM-10, THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY CANNOT ENTERTAIN THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE UNDER SE CTION 11 OF THE ACT AND THEREFORE, COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF THE A CT WILL HAVE TO BE AT ANY TIME BEFORE THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ARE COMPLETED. TH E SUPREME COURT ALSO OBSERVED THAT ANY CLAIM FOR GIVING THE BENEFIT OF S ECTION 11 ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION SUPPLIED SUBSEQUENT TO THE COMPLETION O F ASSESSMENT WOULD MEAN THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WILL HAVE TO BE REOPENED. THE SUPREME COURT NOTICED THAT THE ACT DID NOT CONTEMPLATE SUCH RE-OPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT. IN THE CASE OF CIT V. ANJUMAN MOINIA FAKHARIA [1994 ] 208 ITR 568(RAJ.) IT WAS DECIDED 'FROM THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT DATED JUNE 3,1980, AND THE JUDGMENT OF THE APEX COURT REFERRED TO ABOVE , IT C AN BE CONSIDERED THAT THE REQUIREMENT TO PRESCRIBE (SIC) THE TIME LIMIT IS ON LY DIRECTORY AND NOT MANDATORY. NON COMPLIANCE WITHIN THE TIME SHOULD NOT DISENTITL E AN APPELLANT FROM THE EXEMPTION TO WHICH HE IS OTHERWISE ENTITLED.' THUS THIS PARTICULAR BASIS OF THE AO FOR REJECTING THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT IS ALSO UNFOUNDED. 20. THIRDLY, IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THE AO HAS ALS O STATED THAT ' MOREOVER THERE IS NO RESOLUTION PASSED REGARDING THE ACCUMULATION OF INCOME OF RS 1,82,41,063/-. ON THIS ISSUE THE LD. AR HAS PLEADED THAT THE FORM NO 10 FILED ONLINE BY THE APPELLANT CLEARLY STATES THAT THE - AGGARWAL VIDYA PRACHARINI SABHA HAVING - ANENT NUMBER AABTA3409Q HEREBY BRINGS TO YOUR NOTIC E THAT IT HAS BEEN DECIDED BY A RESOLUTION PASSED BY THE TRUSTEES/GOVE RNING BODY, BY WHATEVER NAME LED, ON 26/09/2014 THAT OUT OF INCOME OF THE T RUST FOR THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 AN AMOUNT O F RS 1,82,41,063/- WHICH IS 7.38% OF THE INCOME OF THE TRUST FOR THE SAID PREVI OUS YEAR SHALL BE ACCUMULATED OR SET APART FOR CARRYING OUT THE PURPOSES OF THE T RUST. 21. THE LD. AR HAS FURTHER PLEADED THAT BY FURNISHI NG A COPY OF FORM 10, THE APPELLANT HAD INFORMED THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT THAT THE RELEVANT RESOLUTION FOR ACCUMULATION OF INCOME UNDER SECTION 11(2) WAS PASSED ON 26/09/2014. THE LD. AR PLEADED THAT THE AO HAD NEVE R DOUBTED THE EXISTENCE OF THIS RESOLUTION AND NEVER ASKED FOR THE COPY THEREO F, AND THEREFORE THE APPELLANT DID NOT FIND ANY REQUIREMENT FOR SUBMITTING A COPY WITH THE AO. A COPY OF THE RESOLUTION HOWEVER WAS ANNEXED WITH THE PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE APPELLANT DURING APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. THUS, OF THIS ISSUE A GAIN I AGREE WITH THE CONTENTION OF THE APPELLANT. 6. BEFORE US, THE LD. DR HEAVILY RELIED ON THE ORDE R OF THE LD. CIT(A). 7. WE HAVE PERUSED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE SUBMISSIONS REPRODUCED IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND WE FI ND THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED ORDER IN A COGENT MANNER BY TAKING INTO CONSIDERATI ON THE FACTS ON RECORD, CONFUSIONS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT, CLAUSES OF THE FINANCE BILL 2015, THE REQUIREMENTS OF MANDATORY FI LING OF FORM 10 FOR THE A.Y. 2014-15 AND A.Y. 2015-16 AND THE JUDICIAL PRONOUNCE MENT ON THE ISSUE OF FILING OF FORM 10 BEFORE THE A.O. HENCE WE HEREBY DECLINE TO INTEREFERE IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN DELETING THE ADDITION. 8. AS A RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- ! . %.. . & , (DIVA SINGH) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) ' #/ JUDICIAL MEMBER '( #/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AG DATE: 04/10/2018 *% + ,- . -(/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. * * ! // CIT 4. * * ! / ()/ THE CIT(A) 5. - 23 4, * # *4), 67839/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 38 :'/ GUARD FILE