1 ITA No. 290/Del/2022 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “H”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 290 /DEL/2022 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Bhagwant Education Foundation 926, Tower A DLF Towers, Jasola, Delhi-110044. PAN- AAATB7012M Vs ACIT, Circle Exemption 1(1), New Delhi. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by Sh. Aditya Pratap Singh, Adv. & Sh. Yatin Khurana, Adv. Department represented by Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR Date of hearing 14.12.2023 Date of pronouncement 24.01.2024 O R D E R PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: The assessee has come in appeal against the order dated 17.12.2021, for the assessment year 2016-17, passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred as “learned First Appellate Authority” or in short “FAA”), in appeal no. CIT, Delhi- 40/10209/2018-19, arising out of assessment order dated 31.12.2018 u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as the “Act”), passed by the ACIT, Circle Exemption 1(1), Delhi, hereinafter referred to as the “AO”). 2 ITA No. 290/Del/2022 2. Heard and perused the record. 3. The assessee is a society, registered under the Societies Act, 1860 and also under Section 12A of the Act. The learned AO examined the issue that the assessee is running Bhagwant University on the land which was provisionally attached u/s 24(4) of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transaction Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as “PBPT Act”) and Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Benami Prohibition), Rajasthan, Jaipur vide order dated 14.11.2018 has considered this property to be benami property and assessee as beneficial owner of the property. Therefore, income of assessee was computed as per the normal provisions and learned CIT(A) has sustained the same, for which the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. At the time of hearing, learned AR has relied order dated 30.11.2022 passed by the Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA (hereinafter referred as ‘SAFEMA Tribunal’) at New Delhi, in an appeal preferred by the present assessee, challenging the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority u/s 26(3) and 24(6) of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transaction Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as “PBPT Act”), as amended by the Act of 2016. 5. As we consider this order, it comes up that the SAFEMA Tribunal has set aside the order of Adjudicating Authority confirming the action of Initiating Officer. This order dated 30.11.2022 is subsequent to the impugned order of 3 ITA No. 290/Del/2022 learned CIT(A) dated 17.12.2021. Thus, we are of the considered view that the subsequent development by way of order of the SAFEMA Tribunal in favour of the assessee, the impugned order of learned AO, which was completely on the foundation of the attachment initiated by the DCIT (Benami Prohibition), Rajasthan, Jaipur, does not sustain. 6. However, as the SAFEMA Tribunal has vide order dated 30.11.2022 has given Department an independent right to initiate action, if any, under the Amendment Act, 2016 of the PBPT Act, 1988, we set aside the impugned orders and restore the issues for de novo adjudication by the AO in the light of order dated 30.11.2022 of SAFEMA Tribunal. 7. Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 24.01.2024. Sd/- Sd/- (G.S. PANNU ) (ANUBHAV SHARMA) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER *MP* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI