ITO, HANUMANGARH V. M/s. Meera Siksha Samiti, SANGARIA

ITA 287/JODH/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5302 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 09-03-2016
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 05-05-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S L MOURYA
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Revised return
• Section: 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELALTE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE: SHRI N. S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.NO.287/JODH/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, COLLECTORATE CIRCLE, HANUMANGARH, RAJASTHAN VS. M/S. MEERA SIKSHA SAMITI, SANGARIA, RAJASTHAN PAN :AACFM0542P APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY SHRI S. L. MOURYA, D.R. RESPONDENT BY NONE DATE OF HEARING: 09.03.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 09.03.16 O R D E R PER: GEORGE MATHAN, J.M. : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT (A), BIKANER PASSED IN APPEAL NO.144/BIKANER/20 -12-13 DATED 14-02- 2014 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. SHRI S. L. MOURYA, LEARNED DR REPRESENTED ON BEH ALF OF THE REVENUE AND NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED DR THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ITS ORIGINAL RETURN ON 20-10-2010 DECLARING INCOME AT RS.10,68,950/-. IT WAS A SUBMIS SION THAT THE DUE DATE FOR FILING OF THE RETURN FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YE AR WAS OCTOBER, 2010. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT, THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED 2 ITA NO.287/JODH/2014 REVISED RETURN ON 25-06-2012 DECLARING INCOME AT RS .45,56,518/-. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD REJECTED THE REVISED RETURN FILED AND NOT TAXED THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE REVISED RE TURN AND THE ORIGINAL RETURN TO THE EXTENT OF RS.34,87,568/-. IT WAS A SU BMISSION THAT ON APPEAL, THE LEARNED CIT (A) HAD DELETED THE ADDITION BY HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD APPLIED MORE THAN 85% OF THE INCOME FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSE AS PER THE REVISED COMPUTATION OF TOTAL INCOME AND JUST BECAUS E CERTAIN RECEIPTS HAD NOT BEEN DISCLOSED IN THE ORIGINAL RETURN DUE TO IGNORA NCE THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT BE DENIED THE BENEFIT OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 11 OF THE ACT ESPECIALLY WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAD APPLIED MORE THAN 85% OF ITS TOTAL INCOME FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSE. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE OR DER OF THE LEARNED CIT (A) WAS LIABLE TO BE REVERSED. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. ADMITT EDLY, THE LEARNED CIT (A) HAS DELETED THE ADDITION AS THE ASSESSEE HAS AP PLIED MORE THAN 85% OF ITS INCOME FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSE. IN FACT, THE LEA RNED CIT (A) HAS CATEGORICALLY GIVEN A FINDING THAT THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME AND THE AUDITED ACCOUNTS ARE REFLECTING THAT THE APPLICATION FOR CH ARITABLE ACTIVITIES IS MORE THAN 85%. THE REVENUE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO DISLODGE THE FINDINGS OF THE LEARNED CIT (A). ONCE, IT IS NOTICED THAT THE ASSES SEE HAS APPLIED MORE THAN 85% OF ITS INCOME FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSE AND IS REG ISTERED AS CHARITABLE TRUST THEN NO ADDITION ON THIS ACCOUNT CAN BE MADE BECAUS E OF IGNORANCE ON THE 3 ITA NO.287/JODH/2014 PART OF THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THE SAME, WE ARE O F THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE FINDING OF THE LEARNED CIT (A) IS ON RIGHT FOOTING AND DOES NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09.03.2016. SD/- SD/- (N. S. SAINI) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JODHPUR, DATED: 09 TH MARCH, 2016 LAKSHMIKANTA LAKSHMIKANTA LAKSHMIKANTA LAKSHMIKANTA DEKA/ DEKA/ DEKA/ DEKA/- -- - COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1 . THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. CIT CONCERNED 4. CIT (A) CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, JODHPUR 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER, SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY DATE INITIAL ORIGINAL DICTATION PAD & DRAFT ARE ENCLOSED IN THE FILE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 09.03.16 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 09.03.16 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 09.03.16 JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER 10.03. 16 JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 10.03.16 SR.PS 6. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT NA SR.PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER