ADIT(E), New Delhi V. M/s. Indian Evangelical Team, New Delhi

ITA 2153/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7062 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 29-06-2016
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 09-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T VASANTHAN SENIOR
• Keywords: Question of law

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI DELHI DELHI DELHI BENCH BENCH BENCH BENCH C CC C : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BEFORE SHRI BEFORE SHRI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND AND AND AND SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER , JUDICIAL MEMBER , JUDICIAL MEMBER , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO ITA NO ITA NO ITA NO . .. . 2153/DEL/2014 2153/DEL/2014 2153/DEL/2014 2153/DEL/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : ASSESSMENT YEAR : ASSESSMENT YEAR : ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010 2010 2010 2010 - -- - 11 1111 11 ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (E), INCOME TAX (E), INCOME TAX (E), INCOME TAX (E), TRUST CIRCLE TRUST CIRCLE TRUST CIRCLE TRUST CIRCLE- -- -I II II, E I, EI, E I, E- -- -2 BLOCK, 2 BLOCK, 2 BLOCK, 2 BLOCK, PRATYAKSH KAR BHAWAN, PRATYAKSH KAR BHAWAN, PRATYAKSH KAR BHAWAN, PRATYAKSH KAR BHAWAN, DR. SHYAMA PRASAD DR. SHYAMA PRASAD DR. SHYAMA PRASAD DR. SHYAMA PRASAD MUKHERJEE CIVIC CENTRE, MUKHERJEE CIVIC CENTRE, MUKHERJEE CIVIC CENTRE, MUKHERJEE CIVIC CENTRE, NEW DELHI NEW DELHI NEW DELHI NEW DELHI 110 002. 110 002. 110 002. 110 002. VS. VS. VS. VS. M/S INDIAN EVANGELICAL TEAM, M/S INDIAN EVANGELICAL TEAM, M/S INDIAN EVANGELICAL TEAM, M/S INDIAN EVANGELICAL TEAM, 126, CHATTARPUR, MEHRAULI, 126, CHATTARPUR, MEHRAULI, 126, CHATTARPUR, MEHRAULI, 126, CHATTARPUR, MEHRAULI, NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. PAN : AAATI0283M. PAN : AAATI0283M. PAN : AAATI0283M. PAN : AAATI0283M. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI T. VAS ANTHAN, SENIOR DR. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI GEORGE KOSHI, CA. DATE OF HEARING : 29.06.2016 29.06.2016 29.06.2016 29.06.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29.06.2016 29.06.2016 29.06.2016 29.06.2016 ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER G.D. AGRAWAL, VP PER G.D. AGRAWAL, VP PER G.D. AGRAWAL, VP PER G.D. AGRAWAL, VP : :: :- -- - THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A)-XXI, N EW DELHI DATED 27 TH JANUARY, 2014. 2. THE ONLY GROUND RAISED IN THIS APPEAL BY THE REV ENUE READS AS UNDER:- ON THE FACTS AND IN CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING THE EXEMPTION U /S 11 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 WHICH WAS DENIED BY AO BECAUSE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS SET UP FOR RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES WHILE CLAIMING CHARITABLE STATUS WHICH IS CLEAR VIOLATION OF SECTION 13(1)(B) OF THE I.T. ACT 1961. ITA-2153/DEL/2014 2 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AN D HAVE PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US. WE FIND THE ISSUE TO BE COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION O F ITAT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 VIDE ITA NO.36 35/DEL/2012 DATED 11 TH SEPTEMBER, 2012. IN THE SAID ORDER, THE ITAT, CON SIDERING VARIOUS DECISIONS OF THE ITAT IN EARLIER YEARS, HAS DECIDED THE APPEAL IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. THE RELEVANT FINDING OF TH E ITAT READS AS UNDER:- 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND GONE THROUGH THE FACTS OF THE CASE. WE FIND THAT THE AO HIMSELF ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR EXEMPTION U/ S 11 OF THE ACT IN THE AYS 1989-90 TO 1991-92, 1995-96 TO 2 004-05 & 2006-07 IN IDENTICAL CIRCUMSTANCES. IN THE AY 19 92-93, THOUGH A SIMILAR CLAIM FOR EXEMPTION WAS DISALLOWED , THE LD.CIT(A) ALLOWED THE CLAIM AND THE ITAT UPHELD THE FINDINGS OF THE LD.CIT(A). ON FURTHER APPEAL, THE QUESTION OF LAW FORMULATED BY HONBLE HIGH COURT IS STATED TO B E PENDING IN ITA NO.6/2002. IN THE AY 1993-94, AO RE JECTED THE CLAIM AND APPEAL IS STATED TO BE PENDING IN ITA NO.216/2002. FOR THE AY 1994-95, THE ITAT UPHELD T HE FINDINGS OF THE LD.CIT(A) ALLOWING THE CLAIM FOR EX EMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT AND THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE H ONBLE HIGH COURT IS STATED TO BE PENDING ADMISSION. IN A Y 2005- 06, THE AO AGAIN DENIED EXEMPTION FOR VIOLATION U/S 13(1)(B) OF THE ACT. HOWEVER, ON APPEAL, THE LD.CI T(A) ALLOWED THE CLAIM AND THE ITAT UPHELD THE FINDINGS OF THE LD.CIT(A) VIDE THEIR ORDER DATED 18 TH JUNE, 2009 IN ITA NO.45/DEL/09. IN THE AYS 2007-08 & 2008-09, THOUGH THE AO DENIED EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT, THE LD.CIT(A ) ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE AY 2007-08 AND THE FATE IN FURTHER APPEAL IS NOT KNOWN WHILE IN TH E AY 2008-09, THE ITAT VIDE THEIR ORDER DATED 26 TH DECEMBER, 2011 IN ITA NO.4671/DEL/2011 UPHELD THE FINDINGS OF LD.CIT(A), GRANTING EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT. T HE LD.CIT(A) IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER FOLLOWED THIS ORDER OF THE ITAT FOR THE AY 2008-09 IN ALLOWING EXEMPTION U/S 1 1 OF THE ACT. IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE REVENUE HAVE NOT PLACED ANY MATERIAL BEFORE US, CONTROVERTI NG THE AFORESAID FINDINGS OF THE LD.CIT(A) NOR BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE ANY CONTRARY DECISION, SO AS TO ENABLE US TO TAKE A DIFFERENT VIEW IN THE MATTER WHILE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR EXEMPTION HAS CONSISTENTLY BEEN ALLOWED IN THE PREC EDING ITA-2153/DEL/2014 3 YEARS, WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO INTERFERE. CONSEQUEN TLY, GROUND NO.1 IN THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 4. ADMITTEDLY, THE FACTS OF THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDER ATION ARE IDENTICAL. LEARNED DR STATED THAT IN THE EARLIER Y EAR, THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AND , THEREFORE, THE MATTER MAY BE KEPT PENDING TILL THE DECISION OF HON 'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT. IN OUR OPINION, MERELY BECAUSE THE EAR LIER YEARS APPEALS ARE PENDING BEFORE THE HIGH COURT WOULD BE NO GROUN D FOR KEEPING THE APPEALS PENDING. WE, THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLO WING THE DECISION OF ITAT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 9-10, UPHOLD THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A) AND DISMISS THE REVENUES A PPEAL. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. DECISION PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29.06.2016 . SD/- SD/- (BEENA A. PILLAI (BEENA A. PILLAI (BEENA A. PILLAI (BEENA A. PILLAI ) )) ) ( (( ( G.D. AGRAWAL G.D. AGRAWAL G.D. AGRAWAL G.D. AGRAWAL ) )) ) JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT VK. COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT : ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (E), ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (E), ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (E), ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (E), TRUST CIRCLE TRUST CIRCLE TRUST CIRCLE TRUST CIRCLE- -- -II, E II, E II, E II, E- -- -2 BLOCK, 2 BLOCK, 2 BLOCK, 2 BLOCK, PRATYAKSH KAR BHAWAN, PRATYAKSH KAR BHAWAN, PRATYAKSH KAR BHAWAN, PRATYAKSH KAR BHAWAN, DR. SHYAMA PRASAD MUKHERJEE CIVIC CENTRE, DR. SHYAMA PRASAD MUKHERJEE CIVIC CENTRE, DR. SHYAMA PRASAD MUKHERJEE CIVIC CENTRE, DR. SHYAMA PRASAD MUKHERJEE CIVIC CENTRE, NEW DELHI NEW DELHI NEW DELHI NEW DELHI 110 002. 110 002. 110 002. 110 002. 2. RESPONDENT : M/S INDIAN EVANGELICAL TEAM, M/S INDIAN EVANGELICAL TEAM, M/S INDIAN EVANGELICAL TEAM, M/S INDIAN EVANGELICAL TEAM, 126, CHATTARPUR 126, CHATTARPUR 126, CHATTARPUR 126, CHATTARPUR, MEHRAULI, NEW DELHI. , MEHRAULI, NEW DELHI. , MEHRAULI, NEW DELHI. , MEHRAULI, NEW DELHI. 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR