The United Provinces Instute of The Blessed Virgin Mary, Allahabad V. ACIT, Allahabad

ITA 35/ALLD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 3520714 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-08-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 14-08-2014
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 05-02-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T P SHUKLA
• Assessee Lawyers: KASHYAP VEPARI
• Section: 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ALLAHABAD BENCH, ALLAHABAD BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 35/ALLD./2014 ASSTT. YEAR : 2009-10 THE UNITED PROVINCES INSTITUTE OF VS. A.C.I.T., R ANGE-II, THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY, ALLAHABAD. ALLAHABAD. (AAATT 2539 D). (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI KASHYAP VEPARI, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI T.P. SHUKLA, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 14.08.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14.08.2014 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), ALLAHABAD DATED 14.10.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10, CHALLENGING THE ADDITION OF RS.7,00,000/-. 2. BRIEFLY, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSE SSEE IS A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE SOCIETIES ACT AS WELL AS U/S. 12AA OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT. THE ASSESSEE IS RUNNING NURSERY SCHOOL IN THE NAME OF ST. MARYS NU RSERY SCHOOL, AT ALLAHABAD SINCE 2001. THE AO NOTED THAT ST. MARYS NURSERY SC HOOL PAID RS.7 LACS TO THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY. THIS AMOUNT HAS BEEN SHOWN IN THE RECEIPT AND PAYMENT ACCOUNT, BUT THIS AMOUNT HAS NOT BEEN SHOWN IN THE INCOME AN D EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY. THIS AMOUNT HAS NOT BEEN SHOWN IN THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE ITA NO. 35/ALLD./2014 2 SOCIETY EITHER. THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY HAD SURPLUS IN COME OVER EXPENDITURE AND REQUESTED THE AO TO CARRY FORWARD THE EXCESS. RS.7 LACS WERE NOT CONSIDERED BY THE SOCIETY AS ITS INCOME. THEREFORE, THE AO, ON NO T BEING SATISFIED WITH THE REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE, MADE THE ADDITION. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD RECEIVED A SUM OF RS.7 LACS FROM ST. MARYS NURSERY SCHOOL BY WAY OF TRANSFER. SAME IS REFLECTING IN THE RECEIPT AND PAYMENT ACCOUNT ON THE RECEIPT S IDE WHILE IN ST. MARYS NURSERY SCHOOLS RECEIPT AND PAYMENT STATEMENT, IT WAS SHOW N ON PAYMENT SIDE. IT WAS, THEREFORE, ONLY A TRANSFER ENTRY. THE AO FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS MANAGING THE NURSERY SCHOOL. THE AO FAIL ED TO APPRECIATE THE FACTS OF THE CASE. ON THE SAME PATTERN, THE ASSESSEE MAINTAINED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT IN EARLIER YEAR AND THE SAME HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE AO. THE LD. CIT(A), HOWEVER, DID NOT ACCEPT THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE AND DISMI SSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND MAT ERIAL ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE IN THE PAPER BOOK FILED RECEIPT AND PAYMEN T STATEMENT FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION OF ST. MARYS NURSERY SCHOOL IN WHICH RS.7 LACS HAVE BEEN SHOWN AS PAYMENT TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE SAME AMOUNT IS SHOW N IN THE RECEIPT AND PAYMENT ACCOUNT ON RECEIPT SIDE IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSE SSEE. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REFERRED TO PAGE 14 OF THE PAPER BOOK TO S HOW THAT IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE SURPLUS OF ST. MARYS NURSERY SCHOOL HAVE BEEN SHOWN IN A SUM OF RS.7,08,189/- AS INCOME AND SATED THAT DUE TO THIS CONFUSION, THE AO MADE ADDITION OF RS.7 LACS WHICH IS PART OF THE SAME AMOUNT AND H AS BEEN TAKEN IN EXCESS OF INCOME OVER EXPENDITURE IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERA TION. HE HAS STATED THAT THERE IS NO SEPARATE AMOUNT TO BE CONSIDERED AS INCOME. IT I S CLEAR FROM THE FACTS OF THE CASE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS RUNNING A NURSERY SCHOOL IN TH E NAME OF ST. MARYS NURSERY ITA NO. 35/ALLD./2014 3 SCHOOL AT ALLAHABAD. THEREFORE, WHATEVER AMOUNT WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM NURSERY SCHOOL WAS SHOWN IN THE RECEIPT AND PA YMENT ACCOUNT AS INCOME. THEREFORE, IT WAS THE AMOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE ITSELF BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE IS RUNNING THE NURSERY SCHOOL. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO QUESTION OF CONSIDERING THE SAME AMOUNT AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE SEPARATELY. IT APPEARS TH AT THE AO HAS NOT APPRECIATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE PROPERLY. THEREFORE, THE ADDITION COULD NOT BE SUSTAINED. WE ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND DELETE THE ADDITION. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (B.C. MEENA) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *AKS/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT BY ORDER 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A), CONCERNED ASSTT. REGISTRAR 4. CIT, CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, ALLAHABAD 6. GUARD FILE TRUE COPY