The ITO, (Exemptions), Ward-2, Ahmedabad V. M/s. Radiological & Imaging Association, Ahmedabad

ITA 2336/AHD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5579 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-11-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 12-09-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K DEV
• Assessee Lawyers: P B PARMAR
• Keywords: Business income; Set aside
• Section: 271(1)(c); 143(1); 143(2); 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO.2336/AHD/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11) INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTION), WARD-2, AHMEDABAD. VS. M/S. RADIOLOGICAL & IMAGING ASSOCIATION, 1 ST FLOOR, SAMVED HOSPITAL, NAVRANGPURA, AHMEDABAD-380 009. [PAN NO. AABTR 4414 N] ( APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. K. DEV, SR. D.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P. B. PARMAR, A.R. DATE OF HEARING 24/08/2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 15/11/2018 O R D E R PER MS. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: THE INSTANT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BEFORE US BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 25.08.2014 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XXI, AHMEDABAD WHEREBY AND WHERE UNDER THE PENALTY OF RS.43,04,800 /- IMPOSED BY THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS BEEN DELETED THE APPEAL HAS B EEN FILED WITH THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1) WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IS THE LD. CIT(A) JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE PENALTY OF RS. 43,04,800/ - LEVIED U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE IT ACT BY THE A.O. 2) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, TH E LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 3) IT IS, THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX (APPEALS) MAY BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE ASSE SSING OFFICER BE RESTORED. - 2 - ITA NO.2336/AHD/2016 ITO VS. RADIOLOGICAL AND IMAGING ASSOCIATION ASST.YEAR 2010-11 2. THE BRIEF FACT LEADING TO THE CASE IS THIS THAT THE ASSESSEE THE TRUST FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 26.07.2010 DECLARING ITS INCOME AT RUPEES NIL AFTER CLAIMING EXEMPTION TO THE EXTENT OF RS.6,59,60,620/ -. THE SAME WAS PROCESSED UNDER SECTION 143(1) OF THE ACT ON 12.04.2011. UPON SCRUTINY NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143( 2) OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED ON 29.09.2011 FOLLOWED BY FURTHER NOTICE DATED 24.08.2 012 UNDER SECTION 143(2) OF THE ACT READ WITH SECTION 129 OF THE ACT DUE TO CHANGE OF I NCUMBENT TO THE OFFICE. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED ON VARIOUS ACTIVITIES TO PROMOTE THE OBJECT S OF THE TRUST BY CONDUCTING CONFERENCES AND DOING EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES REGARDING MEDICAL SCIENCE. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THE ASSESSEE CH ARGED FEE FOR ATTENDING THE CONFERENCES AND RECEIVED AN AMOUNT OF RS.87,36,244/ - FROM DOCTORS WHO ATTENDED SUCH CONFERENCE. FURTHER THAT THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED STAL L/BOOTH INCOME TO THE TUNE OF RS.5,27,64,518/-. THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HOL D THAT THE CONFERENCE HELD BY THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT OF CHARITABLE IN NATURE AS THE REC EIPT OF BOOTH/STALL INCOME TO THE TUNE OF RS.5,27,64,518/- ARE FROM COMMERCIAL ORGANIZATIONS. ACCORDING TO THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HOSTING OF THIS CONFERENCE WAS NOT OF CHARI TABLE NATURE SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS CHARGED PARTICIPANTS ON COMMERCIAL BASIS. FINALLY T HE ASSESSEES CLAIM OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 11(1)(A), 11(2) OF THE ACT AND THE EXPENSES TOWARDS SUCH MEDICAL RELIEF WERE DISALLOWED TO THE TUNE OF RS.3,54,74,600/- IN TOTAL . PENALTY PROCEEDING UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) WAS ALSO INITIATED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE B Y THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER. 3. IN THE PENALTY PROCEEDING THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER BY AND UNDER THE ORDER DATED 30.04.2015 IMPOSED PENALTY OF RS. 43,04,800/- . BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS - 9 WHO IN TURN THE DELETED SUCH PENALTY BY AND UNDER THE ORDE R DATED 20.07.2016. HENCE THE INSTANT APPEAL BEFORE US PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST S UCH DELETION OF PENALTY. - 3 - ITA NO.2336/AHD/2016 ITO VS. RADIOLOGICAL AND IMAGING ASSOCIATION ASST.YEAR 2010-11 AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE INSTANT APPEAL THE L EARNED COUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT THE QUANTUM ORDER 20.03.2013 WAS CHALLENGED BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) WHO IN TURN CONFIRMED THE SAME. THE COORDINATE BENCH IN ITA NO. 2891/AHD/2014 FOR A.Y. 2010-11 WAS PLEASED TO HOLD THAT THE ASSESSEE'S INCOME IS ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT AND FURTHE R PLEASED TO DIRECT THE LEARNED ASSESSING TO ACT ACCORDINGLY. PRACTICALLY ASSESSEE S APPEAL BEFORE THE LEARNED TRIBUNAL WAS ALLOWED. A COPY OF THE SAID ORDER PASSED BY THE COORDINATE BENCH HAS ALSO BEEN HANDED OVER TO US AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APP EAL. IN THAT VIEW OF THE MATTER THE LEARNED COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT SINCE THE QUANTUM OR DER PASSED BY THE AUTHORITY BELOW HAS BEEN REJECTED BY THE LEARNED TRIBUNAL THE VERY BASI S OF THE PENALTY ORDER HAS LOST ITS FORCE. HE, THEREFORE, PRAYS FOR AN ORDER OF REJECTI ON OF THE ORDER IMPUGNED BEFORE US. ON THE CONTRARY THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE DEPA RTMENT RELIES UPON THE ORDER PASSED BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RESPECTIVE PARTIES, PERUSED TH E RELEVANT MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE COORDINATE BENCH BY ITS OR DER DATED 28.03.2018 ALLOWED THE APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) REJECTING THE QUANTUM ORDER WITH THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION: 6. WE SEE NO REASONS TO TAKE ANY OTHER VIEW OF TH E MATTER THAN THE VIEW SO TAKEN BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOW ING THE SAME, WE REVERSE THE ACTION OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, IN TREATING THE IN COME FROM HOLDING CONFERENCES BUSINESS INCOME. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, THE INCOME FROM HOLDING THE CONFERENCE, ON THE FACTS OF THIS CASE, WHICH ARE ADMITTEDLY IN PARI MATERIA WITH THE FACTS OF HEART CARE MANAGEMENT (SUPRA), OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN T REATED AS INCOME ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 . THE ASSESSING OFFICER, ACCORDINGLY, IS DIRECTED T O DO SO. IN THAT VIEW OF THE MATTER WE DO NOT HESITATE TO OB SERVE THAT SINCE THE VERY BASIS OF THE ORDER OF PENALTY BEING THE QUANTUM ORDER BEING REVERSED BY THE COORDINATE BENCH THE - 4 - ITA NO.2336/AHD/2016 ITO VS. RADIOLOGICAL AND IMAGING ASSOCIATION ASST.YEAR 2010-11 ORDER OF PENALTY HAS LOST ITS FORCE TO STAND UPON; IN FACT THE APPEAL BEFORE US BECOMES INFRUCTUOUS. WE, THEREFORE, DISMISS THE APPEAL PREF ERRED BY THE REVENUE AS INFRUCTUOUS. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSE D AS INFRUCTUOUS. THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 15/11/2018 SD/- SD/- ( WASEEM AHMED ) ( MS. MADHUMITA ROY ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 15/11/2018 PRITI YADAV, SR.PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. () / THE CIT(A)-XXI, AHMEDABAD 5. , ! ' , #$%% / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. &' () / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) !, #$ / ITAT, AHMEDABAD