DCIT (E), New Delhi V. M/s. Quality Council of India, New Delhi

ITA 3202/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7110 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-07-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 01-06-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LEARNED CITA HAS DEL ETED
• Keywords: Question of law
• Section: 12A; 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : B , NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU , JUDICIAL M EMBER AND SH. T.S. KAPOOR , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO S .3201 & 3202 /DE L/ 2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2010 - 11 & 2012 - 13 DCIT(E), CIRCLE - 2(1), ROOM NO.240B, 24 TH FLOOR, E - 2 BLOCK, DR. S.P. MUKHERJEE CIVIC CENTRE, NEW DELHI VS. QUALITY COUNCIL OF INDIA 2 ND FLOOR, INSTITUTION OF ENGINEERING BUILDING, BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR MARG, NEW DELHI PAN : AAATQ0055D ( APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) ORDER PER T.S. KAPOOR , A. M. : THESE TWO APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST SEPARATE ORDERS OF LEARNED CIT(A) , BOTH DATED 04.03.2016 . SINCE COMMON GROUNDS HAVE BEEN TAKEN IN THESE APPEALS, THESE WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND, THEREFORE, FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, COMMON AND CONS OLIDATED ORDER IS BEING PASSED. 2. AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE FACTS THAT IN THESE YEARS THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD DISALLOWED THE EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE ACT ) AND THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS DEL ETED APPELLANT BY SH. VIJAY KR. JIWANI, SR.DR RESPONDENT BY SH. H.B. CHAWLA, SR. ADVISOR DATE OF HEARING 18.07.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 18.07.2018 2 ITA NO S . 3201 & 3202/DEL/2016 THE SAME BY HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 12 , VIDE ORDER DATED 05.06.2018 IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE ITSELF, THE TRIBUNAL BY FOLLOWING THE ORDER IN ASSESSME NT YEAR S 20 0 9 - 10 AND 2013 - 14 HAS ALREADY DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AND, THEREFORE, THE ISSUE IN THE APPEALS IS SQUARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT DURING 2009 - 10, THE ISSUE TRAVELLED UP TO THE HON BLE HIGH CO URT ALSO AND THE HON BLE HIGH COURT VIDE ORDER DATED 14 TH DECEMBER, 2016 HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. 3. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ON THE OTHER HAND, SUBMITTED THAT THE ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE CAN ONLY BE COVERED UNDER THE PROVISO OF ADVANCEMENT OF ANY OTHER OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY, WHICH CAN ONLY BE TREATED AS EXEMPT , IF THE TOTAL RECEIPT S FROM SUCH RECEIPT ARE LESS THAN RS.10,00,000/ - , WHEREAS IN THE PRESENT CASES THE RECEIPTS WERE IN CRORES. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THOUGH THE TRIBUNAL HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE AGAINST THE REVENUE, BUT THE DEPARTMENT HAS NOT ACCEPTED THE DECISION AND HAS CONTESTED THE ISSUE BEFORE THE HIGHER COURT. RELIANCE WAS PLACED IN A NUMBER OF CASE - LAWS LISTED IN THE WRITTEN S UBMISSION 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND HAVE GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT WHICH THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS HIMSELF NOTED IN HIS ORDER, HOWEVER, HE HAS H ELD THAT THE SOCIETY WAS HIT BY THE PROVISO TO SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT AND, THEREFORE, HE DENIED THE EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT. LEARNED CIT(A) , AFTER GOING THROUGH THE SUBMISSION OF THE 3 ITA NO S . 3201 & 3202/DEL/2016 ASSESSEE , ALLOWED THE APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE. WE FURTHER FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE ITSELF , VIDE ORDER DATED 05.06.2018 IN ITA NO. 2677 /DEL/2015 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 12 , HAS ALREADY DISMISSED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BY FOLLOWING THE ORDERS IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE ITSELF FOR ASSES SMENT YEAR S 2009 - 10 AND 2013 - 14. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, T HE FINDINGS OF THE HON BLE TRIBUNAL CONTAINED IN PARAS 9 TO 11 IN ITA NO. 2677/DEL/2015 ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER: 9. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE HAVE A LSO GONE THROUGH THE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10 AND 2013 - 14. WE FIND THAT THE MATTER TRAVELLED UPTO THE HON BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT OF DELHI AND THE HON BLE HIGH COURT IN TAX APPEAL NO. 867 OF 2016 HAS FOUND THAT THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IS SOUND IN LAW AND ON FACTS AND, THEREFORE, NO SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW ARISES AND THE HON BLE HIGH COURT DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. 10. AS NO DISTINGUISHING DECISION HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD IN FAVOUR OF THE REV ENUE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE CO - ORDINATE BENCHES AND ALSO THE HON BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 11. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IN ITA NO. 2677/DEL/2015 IS DISMISSED. 5. THE HON BLE TRIBUNAL IN ITS ORDER FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 12, HAS NOTED THAT THE PROCEEDINGS FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10 HAD TRAVELLED UP TO THE HON BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AND THE HON BLE HIGH COURT, VIDE ORDER DATED 14.12.2016 IN ITA NO. 867/2016, HAD UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. THEREFORE, 4 ITA NO S . 3201 & 3202/DEL/2016 FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE HON BLE HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE ITSELF, THE CASE - LAWS RELIED ON BY THE LEARNED DR WHICH ARE DISTINGUISHABLE AND ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE. 5. F INDING FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE S PARI MATERIA TO THE FACT S IN ITA NO. 867/2016 DECIDED BY THE HON BLE HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ITSELF , WE DISMISS BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE. 6. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. THE DECISION IS PRONOUN CED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18 TH JULY , 201 8 . SD/ - SD/ - ( H.S. SIDH U ) ( T.S. KAPOOR ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 18 TH JULY , 201 8 . RK / - COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT 4 . CIT(A) 5 . DR ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI