Income Tax Officer-2(1), Lucknow V. M/s Ghayasiban Educational & Welfare Society, Lucknow

ITA 320/LKW/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 87751 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-02-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 08-01-2015
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 25-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ROHIT BHALLA
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Tax effect

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.320/LKW/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2010 - 11 M/S GHAYASIBAN EDUCATIONAL & WELFARE SOCIETY, B - 132 - C, MANAHAGAR, LUCKNOW. PAN:AAAAG1055E VS INCOME TAX OFFICER - 2(1), LUCKNOW. (RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT) SHRI K. K. UPADHYAY, D. R. APPELLANT BY SHRI ROHIT BHALLA, C. A. RESPONDENT BY 08/01/2015 DATE OF HEARING 19 /02/2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. THIS IS REVENUES APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A) - I, LUCKNOW DATED 11/02/2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 2011. 2. IN THIS APPEAL THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.50,000/ - WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO JUSTIFY THAT THE BUSES OR SCORPIO JEEP WAS WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY USED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.6,00,000/ - WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY HAS ALREADY DEBITED THE EXPENSES OF BUS REPAIR AND GENSET REPAIR IN THE INCOME & EX PENDITURE ACCOUNT WHICH IS CLAIMED TO BE PART OF REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE OF BUILDING & GENERAL. 3. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.3,67,720/ - WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CHANGE D ITS SUBMISSION IN RESPECT OF ADDITION OF TRAVELLING/TOUR EXPENSES AND ALSO FAILED TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE IN ITS SUPPORT. 2 4. APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD OR AMEND THE GROUND OF APPEAL, AS STATED ABOVE AS AND WHEN NEED OF DOING SO ARISES WITH THE PRIOR PERM ISSION OF THE HON'BLE BENCH. 5. THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) BEING ERRONEOUS IN THE EYE OF LAW BE CANCELLED AND THE ORDER OF THE AO BE SUSTAINED. 3. AT THE VERY OUTSET, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LEARNED A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE THAT TAX EFFECT IN THIS APPEAL OF TH E REVENUE IS BELOW RS.4 LACS AND AS PER THE RECENT GUIDELINES OF CBDT, ANY APPEAL OF THE REVENUE HAVING TAX EFFECT BELOW RS.4 LACS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. HE SUBMITTED THAT SINCE IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE TAX EFFECT IS BELOW RS.4 LACS, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. 4. LEARNED D.R. OF THE REVENUE COULD NOT SHOW US THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS MORE THAN RS.4 LACS . 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE. WE FIND THAT THE TAX EFF ECT IN THE PRESENT APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS BELOW RS.4 LACS AND HENCE , AS PER THE INSTRUCTIONS OF THE CBDT, THE REVENUE WAS NOT SUPPOSE D TO FILE THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. HENCE, WE HOLD THAT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/. SD/. (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 19 /0 2 /2015 *C.L.SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1.THE APPELLANT 2.THE RESPONDENT. 3.CONCERNED CIT 4.THE CIT(A) 3 5.D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW ASSTT. REGISTRAR