DCIT (Exemption), New Delhi V. M/s. The Delhi Public School Society, New Delhi

ITA 2761/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5699 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-08-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 04-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S S RANA
• Keywords: Capital asset; Business income; Depreciation; Charitable institution; Question of law; Capital expenditure
• Section: 143(3); 12A; 12AA; 12; 11

Judgement Text

ITA NO.-2761/DEL/2017. THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY. PAGE 1 OF 16 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: G: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO:- 2761/DEL/2017 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14) DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (E), CIRCLE- 2(1), NEW DELHI. VS. M/S THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY, F-BLOCK, EAST OF KAILASH, NEW DELHI- 110065. PAN NO: AAATT0740J APPELLANT RESPONDENT REVENUE BY : SHRI S.S. RANA, CIT(DR) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI NIRBHAY MEHTA, CA ORDER PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, AM (A) THIS APPEAL BY REVENUE IS FILED AGAINST THE ORD ER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-40, DELHI, [LD. CIT(A), FOR SHORT], DATED 27.02.2017 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE AS UNDER: I. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW & FACT BY IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE R ECEIPT ARE ON ACCOUNT OF FRANCHISEE FEES AND SAME ARE IN THE NATURE OF BUSIN ESS INCOME WITHIN THE MEANING OF PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTION 4A OF THE SECTION 11 OF THE I.T. ITA NO.-2761/DEL/2017. THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY. PAGE 2 OF 16 ACT. THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO MAINTAIN SEPARATE BOOK S OF ACCOUNTS AS PER SUB SECTION 12A OF THE SECTION 2 OF THE I.T. ACT. II. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW ALLOWING THE CLAIM OF CARRY FORWARD OF LOSSES DISREGARDING THE FACT THAT SET-OFF AND CARRY FORWAR D OF LOSSES ARE DELETE WITH BY THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 70 TO 74 OF THE I NCOME TAX ACT. III. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE AND IN LAWS, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW & FACT THAT ALLOWING DEPREC IATION ON FIXED ASSETS IN TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE DEDUCTION AS THE EXPENDITUR E ON FIXED ASSET IS ALREADY ALLOWED. IV. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, TO ALT ER OR AMEND ANY GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED ABOVE AT THE TIME OF HEARING. (B) DURING APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS IN INCOME TAX APPELLAT E TRIBUNAL (ITAT, FOR SHORT), COPIES OF THE FOLLOWING ORDERS WERE FILED FROM ASSE SSEES SIDE: I. ITAT ORDER DATED 20/04/2005 FOR AY 2001-02 IN THE C ASE OF THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY V. DCIT(E) ITA NO. 45 71/D/2004. II. ITAT ORDER DATED 23/05/2019 FOR AY 2012-13 IN THE C ASE OF DCIT(E) V. THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY ITA NO. 4887/D/2016. III. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (E) V. DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SO CIETY HIGH COURT OF DELHI 92 TAXMANN.COM 132 IV. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (E) V. DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SO CIETY SUPREME COURT OF INDIA 100 TAXMANN.COM 80. V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX III V. RAJASTHAN & GUJA RATI CHARITABLE FOUNDATION POONA SUPREME COURT OF INDI A 89 TAXMANN.COM 127 ITA NO.-2761/DEL/2017. THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY. PAGE 3 OF 16 VI. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX V. RAGHUVANSHI CHARITABLE TR UST HIGH COURT OF DELHI 197 TAXMAN 170 (B.1) AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, THE LD. AUT HORIZED REPRESENTATIVE (AR, FOR SHORT) OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE DISPU TED ISSUES ARE COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE AFORESAID JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS. THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT, IN IDENTICAL FACTS, IN ASSESSEES O WN CASE, THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF ITAT, DELHI HAS ALREADY TAKEN A VIEW, ON THE DISPUT ED ISSUES, IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE AFORESAID ORDER DATED 23.05.2019. THE LD. CIT (DR) APPEARING FOR REVENUE ACCEPTED THAT ALL THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE WERE COVERE D IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE AFORESAID JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS, IN WHICH, IN IDENTIC AL FACTS, THE DISPUTED ISSUES WERE DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. (B.1.1) RELEVANT PORTION OF THE AFORESAID ORDER DATED 20.04.2005 OF CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF ITAT, DELHI IN ITA NO. 4571/DEL/2004 IN AS SESSEES OWN CASE I.E. THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY VS. DCIT(E) IS REPRODUCED AS U NDER: ITA NO.-2761/DEL/2017. THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY. PAGE 4 OF 16 ITA NO.-2761/DEL/2017. THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY. PAGE 5 OF 16 ITA NO.-2761/DEL/2017. THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY. PAGE 6 OF 16 ITA NO.-2761/DEL/2017. THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY. PAGE 7 OF 16 ITA NO.-2761/DEL/2017. THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY. PAGE 8 OF 16 (B.1.2) THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE AFORESAID ORD ER DATED 23.05.2019 OF CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF ITAT, DELHI IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN DCIT (E) VS. THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY IN ITA NO. 4887/DEL/2016 IS REPRODUCED AS U NDER: THE AFORESAID APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 01.06.2016, PASSED BY LD. COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XL, NEW DELHI FOR THE QUANTUM OF ASSESSMENT PASSED U/S. 143(3) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YE AR 2012-13 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN ICTW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW & FACT BY IGNORING THE FACT THAT T HE RECEIPTS ARE ON ACCOUNT OF FRANCHISEE FEES AND SAME ARE IN THE NATU RE OF BUSINESS INCOME WITHIN THE MEANING OF PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTION 4A OF THE SECTION 11 OF ITA NO.-2761/DEL/2017. THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY. PAGE 9 OF 16 THE IT ACT. THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO MAINTAIN SEPARA TE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AS PER SUB-SECTION 12A OF THE SECTION 2 OF THE I.T. ACT. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING THE DEPRECIATION AMOUN TING OF RS. 11,52,34,406/- AS IN A CASE WHERE THE CAPITAL EXPEN DITURE HAS BEEN TREATED TO HAVE BEEN APPLIED FOR THE OBJECT OF THE TRUST, ALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION ON ACCOUNT OF DEPRECIATION WILL AMOUNT TO DOUBLE DEDUCTION. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW, THE LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING THE DEFICIT OF EARLIER ASSESSMENT, AS THERE IS NO PROVISION FOR SET OFF OF LOSSES U/S 11, 12 AND 1 3 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW, THE LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING THE CLA IM OF CARRY FORWARD OF LOSSES DISREGARDING THE FACTS THAT THE SETOFF AND C ARRY FORWARD OF LOSSES ARE DEALT WITH BY THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 70,71,7 2,73 &74 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 2. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. AR STATED THAT THE IMPUGNED ISSUES RAISED IN THIS APPEAL ARE SQUARELY COVERED IN FAVOU R OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE BY THE DECISION OF THE CO- ORDINATE BENCH IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE IN 6627/DEL/2 015 FOR A.Y. 2010-11 VIDE ORDER DATED 29 TH NOVEMBER, 2017. 3. THE LD. DR, OTHER THAN SUPPORTING THE FINDINGS OF T HE ASSESSING OFFICER, COULD NOT BRING ANY DISTINGUISHING DECISI ON IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE ITA NO.-2761/DEL/2017. THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY. PAGE 10 OF 16 4. AFTER CONSIDERING THE IMPUGNED ORDERS AND THE IS SUES RAISED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL, WE FIND THAT SIMILAR ISSUES WER E INVOLVED IN THE EARLIER YEARS AND WERE CONSIDERED BY THE CO-ORD INATE BENCH. THE RELEVANT OBSERVATION READS AS UNDER: GROUND NO. 1 4. THIS GROUND HAS BEEN RAISED BY REVENUE AGAINST THE ADDITION THAT HAS BEEN DELETED IN RESPECT OF FRANCHISEE FEES RECE IVED BY ASSESSEE FROM DIFFERENT SATELLITE SCHOOLS WHICH ARE RUNNING UNDER THE NAME AND LOGO OF ASSESSEE, HAVING DIFFERENT MANAGEMENT THAN ASSESSEE SOCIETY. 4.1 IT IS SEEN FROM VARIOUS ORDERS PLACED IN THE PA PER BOOK FOR THE VARIOUS ASSESSMENT YEARS IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE PASSED BY T HIS TRIBUNAL THAT THIS ISSUE NOW STANDS SETTLED IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE AND AGAINST REVENUE. IT IS ALSO OBSERVED THAT LD. CIT(A) FOLLOWED THE BI NDING DECISION OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE PREVIOUS AS SESSMENT YEARS. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER PASSED BY ID. CIT(A) AND THE GROUND RAISED BY REVENUE STANDS DISM ISSED. 5. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFORESAID PRECEDENCE, WHICH IS ALSO APPLICABLE IN THIS GROUND OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISS ED. 6. IN GROUND NO. 2 IN ITA NO. 6627/DEL/2015 (SUPRA) , THE RELEVANT FINDINGS GIVEN QUA GROUND NO. 2 & 3 OF APPEAL HAVE BEEN GIVEN IN PARAGRAPH 5 WHICH READS AS UNDER: 5. THIS GROUND HAS BEEN RAISED BY REVENUE, AS LD. CIT (A) ALLOWED DEDUCTION ON ACCOUNT OF DEPRECIATION. THE LD. AO WA S OF THE OPINION THAT ASSESSEE WAS A TRUST AND IT WAS DERIVING INCOME FRO M DEPRECIABLE ASSETS. AS ASSESSEE TOOK INTO ACCOUNT DEPRECIATION ON THOSE ASSETS WHILE ITA NO.-2761/DEL/2017. THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY. PAGE 11 OF 16 COMPUTING INCOME OF TRUST, LD.AO HELD THAT DEPRECIA TION COULD NOT BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BECAUSE FULL CAPITAL EXPENDITURE HAS BEEN ALLOWED IN THE YEAR OF ACQUISITION OF THE ASSETS. THE LD. DR P LACED RELIANCE UPON THE DECISION OF HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF DIT VS. CHIRANJIV CHARITABLE TRUST REPORTED IN 223 TAXMANN.COM 71. 5.1. ON THE CONTRARY ASSESSEE PLACED RELIANCE UPON A SU BSEQUENT DECISION OF HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. INDRAPRASTHA CANCER SOCIETY REPORTED IN 53 TAXMANN.COM 463. 5.2. WE HAVE PERUSED THE SUBMISSIONS ADVANCED BY BOTH T HE SIDES IN THE LIGHT OF THE DECISIONS RELIED UPON BY THEM. 5.3. IT IS OBSERVED THAT ORDER PASSED BY THIS TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 IN ITA NO. 408 1/DEL/2012 PLACED AT PAGE 68 OF THE PAPER BOOK DEALT WITH THIS ISSUE AS UNDER: 10. FURTHERMORE, WE NOTE THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONA L HIGH COURT DECISION IN THE CASE OF DIT VS. VISHWA JAGRITI MISSION IN IT A NO. 140/2012 VIDE ORDER DATED 29.3.2012. IN THIS CASE THE LD.CIT(A) O N THE BASIS OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE -. LD.DIT(E) ACCEPTED ASSESSEE S CLAIM FOR EXEMPTION U/S 11. AS REGARDS THE CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION ON FIX ED ASSETS UTILIZED FOR CHARITABLE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST, HE ACCEPTED ASSESS EES CLAIM. THE TRIBUNAL CONFIRMED THE DECISION OF LD.CIT(A) ON APP EAL. ON APPEAL THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT HAS HELD AS UNDER. THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN GRA NTED REGISTRATION U/S 12AA AND, THEREFORE, IT WAS ENTITL ED TO EXEMPTION OF ITS INCOME U/S 11. THE ONLY QUESTION IS WHETHER THE INC OME OF THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE COMPUTED ON COMMERCIAL PRINCIPLES AND IN DOING SO WHETHER DEPRECIATION ON FIXED ASSETS UTILIZED FOR THE CHARI TABLE PURPOSES SHOULD BE ALLOWED. ON THIS ISSUE, THERE SEEMS TO BE A CONS ENSUS OF JUDICIAL ITA NO.-2761/DEL/2017. THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY. PAGE 12 OF 16 THINKING. HAVING REGARD, TO THE CONSENSUS OF JUDICIAL OPINION , WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO ADMIT THE APPEAL AND FRAME ANY SUBSTANT IAL QUESTION OF LAW. THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE ANY CONTRARY VIEW PLAUS IBLE ON THE QUESTION RAISED BEFORE US AND AT ANY RATE NO JUDGEMENT TAKIN G A CONTRARY VIEW HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE. 7. THUS, RESPECTFULLY, FOLLOWING THE SAME, GROUND NO. 2 IS DISMISSED. 8. IN GROUNDS NO.3 & 4 IN ITA NO.6627/DEL/2015 (SUPRA ), THE RELEVANT FINDINGS GIVEN QUA GROUNDS NO.4 & 5 OF THA T APPEAL AT PARAGRAPH 6.2 READ AS UNDER: 6.2.1 LD. AR A THE OUTSET SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE STANDS COVERED BY THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 4081/DEL/2012 FOR ASSESSMENT YE AR 2009-10. THIS TRIBUNAL DEALT WITH THIS ISSUE AS UNDER: 16. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS IN LIGHT O F THE MATERIAL 'PRODUCED AND PRECEDENT RELIED UPON. LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF TH E ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT I N THE CASE OF RAGHUVANSHI CHARITABLE TRUST (SUPRA). THE LD. DEPAR TMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE COULD NOT PRODUCE ANY DECISION CONTR ARY IN THIS REGARD. 17. HENCE, UPON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION, WE FIND THAT TH E HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF D.I.T. VS. RAGHUVANSHI CH ARITABLE TRUST (SUPRA) HAS HELD AS UNDER (HEADS NOTES ONLY):- ITA NO.-2761/DEL/2017. THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY. PAGE 13 OF 16 'SECTION 11 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 - CHARITABL E OR RELIGIOUS TRUST - EXEMPTION OF INCOME FROM PROPERTY HELD UNDER - WHET HER A TRUST CAN BE ALLOWED TO CARRY FORWARD DEFICIT OF CURRENT YEAR AN D TO SET OFF SAME AGAINST INCOME OF SUBSEQUENT YEARS - HELD, YES - WH ETHER ADJUSTMENT OF DEFICIT OF CURRENT YEAR AGAINST INCOME OF SUBSEQUEN T YEAR WOULD AMOUNT TO APPLICATION OF INCOME OF TRUST FOR CHARITABLE PU RPOSES IN SUBSEQUENT YEAR WITHIN MEANING OF SECTION 11(1 )(A) - HELD, YE S.' 18. IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID EXPOSITION BY THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, WE FIND THAT THERE IS NO INFIRMITY IN THE OR DER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A), ACCORDINGLY, WE UPH OLD THE SAME. IN THE RESULT, THE ISSUE RAISED BY THE REVENUE STANDS DISM ISSED. 6.3 RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAME WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 9. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE AND RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAME, GROUNDS NO. 3 & 4 ARE DISMISSED. (B.2) IN THE CASE OF AFORESAID PRECEDENT OF DIT(E) V S. DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY [2018] 92 TAXMANN.COM 132 (DELHI), IT WAS HELD BY H ONBLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WAS M AINTAINING SCHOOLS IN FURTHERANCE OF EDUCATIONAL PURPOSE AND THAT ALSO QUALIFIED AS C HARITABLE PURPOSE UNDER SECTION 2(15) AND, THEREFORE, ASSESSEE SOCIETY FULFILLED REQUIREM ENTS TO QUALIFY FOR EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 10(23C)(VI). IN THE CASE OF DIT(E) VS. DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY[2018] 100 TAXMANN.COM 80(SC), A SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION OF REV ENUE AGAINST THE AFORESAID ORDER OF HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT WAS DISMISSED BY HONBLE S UPREME COURT. ITA NO.-2761/DEL/2017. THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY. PAGE 14 OF 16 (B.2.1) IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. RAJASTHAN & GUJAR ATI CHARITABLE FOUNDATION POONA [2018] 89 TAXMANN.COM 127 (SC), IT WAS HELD BY HON BLE SUPREME COURT THAT IN THE CASE OF CHARITABLE INSTITUTION REGISTERED UNDER SEC TION 12A, EVEN THOUGH EXPENDITURE INCURRED FOR ACQUISITION OF CAPITAL ASSETS WAS TREA TED AS APPLICATION OF INCOME FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES UNDER SECTION 11(1)(A), YET DEP RECIATION WOULD BE ALLOWED ON ASSETS SO PURCHASED. (B.2.2) IN THE CASE OF DIT VS. RAGHUVANSHI CHAR ITABLE TRUST [2011] 197 TAXMAN 170 (DELHI), IT WAS HELD BY HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT TH AT A TRUST CAN BE ALLOWED TO CARRY FORWARD DEFICIT OF CURRENT YEAR AND TO SET OFF SAME AGAINST INCOME OF SUBSEQUENT YEARS. IT WAS FURTHER HELD BY HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THIS CASE THAT ADJUSTMENT OF DEFICIT OF CURRENT YEAR AGAINST INCOME OF SUBSEQUENT YEAR WOUL D AMOUNT TO APPLICATION OF INCOME OF TRUST FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES IN SUBSEQUENT YEAR WITHIN MEANING OF SECTION 11(1)(A). (C) WE HAVE HEARD BOTH SIDES. WE HAVE PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED THE JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS BRO UGHT TO OUR NOTICE. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, BOTH SIDES HAVE AGREED THAT THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE ARE COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE AFORESAID JUDICIAL PR ECEDENTS MENTIONED IN FOREGOING PARAGRAPHS (B) AND SUB PARAGRAPHS (B.1), (B.1.1), ( B.1.2), (B.2), (B.2.1) AND (B.2.2). THE FIRST GROUND OF APPEAL IS DISMISSED ACCORDINGLY AND THE ISSUE IS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE PRECEDENTS REFERRED TO IN THE FOREGOING PARAGRAPHS (B.1.1), (B.1.2), AND (B.2) OF THIS ORDE R. FURTHER, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFORESAID PRECEDENTS REFERRED TO IN FOREGOING PARAG RAPHS (B.1.2) AND (B.2.2) OF THIS ITA NO.-2761/DEL/2017. THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY. PAGE 15 OF 16 ORDER, THE SECOND GROUND OF APPEALS IS DISMISSED AND THE DISPUTED IS SUE IS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. FURTHERMORE, RESPECTFULLY F OLLOWING THE AFORESAID PRECEDENTS REFERRED TO IN FOREGOING PARAGRAPHS (B.1.2) AND (B. 2.1) OF THIS ORDER, THIRD GROUND OF APPEAL IS DISMISSED, AND THE DISPUTED ISSUE IS DECI DED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. (D) IN THE RESULT, ALL THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED BY REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. ACCORDINGLY, REVENUE'S APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 8 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019. SD/- SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) (ANADEE NATH MISS HRA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBE R DATED: 08.08.2019 POOJA/- COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI ITA NO.-2761/DEL/2017. THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY. PAGE 16 OF 16 DATE OF DICTATION DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE OF ITAT DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER