ACIT, Varanasi V. M/s Swami Atulanand Rachna Parishad, Varanasi

ITA 358/ALLD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 35820714 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 29-10-2012
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 16-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAGDISH
• Section: 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ALLAHABAD BENCH, ALLAHABAD BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.L. GEHLOT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 358/A/2010 ASSTT. YEAR : 2007-08 A.C.I.T., RANGE-3, VS. M/S. SWAMI ATULANAND RACHN A PARISHAD, VARANASI. GILAT BAZAR, VARANASI. (PAN: AADTS 5086 P) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI JAGDISH, CIT/DR RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 29.10.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER : 31.10.2012 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), VARANASI DATED 11.10.2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 007-08. 2. BRIEFLY, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSE SSING OFFICER PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31.12.2009 U/S.143(3) OF THE IT ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT THE CCIT, ALLAHABAD HAS REJECTED THE APP LICATION OF THE ASSESSEE U/S. 10(23C)(VI) OF THE IT ACT. FURTHER, THE LD. CIT, VA RANASI PASSED THE ORDER U/S. 12AA(3) ON DATED 07.10.2009 AND THE REGISTRATION GR ANTED TO THE ASSESSEE U/S. 12AA HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS, THEREFORE, OF THE VIEW THAT ITA NO. 358/A/2010 2 THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ENTITLED FOR CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S. 11 OF THE IT ACT. IT WAS ALSO NOTED THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ENGAGED IN EDU CATIONAL ACTIVITIES, THEREFORE, BENEFIT OF SECTION 10(23C) CANNOT BE GRANTED AND FU RTHER THE PERSONS COVERED BY THE DEFINITION OF RELATIVE AS PER SECTION 13(3) A RE GETTING BENEFIT. THEREFORE, THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS HIT BY SECTION 13 OF THE IT ACT. CONSEQUENTLY, THE DEDUCTION U/S. 11 WAS DENIED AND STATUS OF THE ASSESSEE WAS C ONSIDERED AS AOP AND INCOME WAS COMPUTED ACCORDINGLY. 2.1 IT WAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 10(23C) AND SECTION 11 ARE DIFFERENT AND INDEPENDENT. IT WA S ALSO SUBMITTED THAT ITAT, ALLAHABAD BENCH VIDE ORDER DATED 30.03.2010 PASSED IN ITA NO. 250/ALL/2009, ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE, CANCELING THE O RDER U/S. 12AA(3) OF THE ACT AND RESTORED THE REGISTRATION U/S. 12AA OF THE IT ACT. THE GIST OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IS NOTED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER, IN WHICH T HE TRIBUNAL ALSO NOTED THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 11 AND SECTION 10(23C)(VI) AR E INDEPENDENT. IT WAS, THEREFORE, SUBMITTED THAT SINCE THE REGISTRATION IS RESTORED I N FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE IS EXEMPT U/S. 11 OF THE IT ACT. COMMENTS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WERE CALLED FOR AT THE APPELLATE STAGE, IN WHICH THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE LIGHT OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY IS NOW ENTITLED FOR BENEFIT OF SECTION 11 OF THE IT ACT. THE LD. CIT(A) WITH REGARD TO THE ISSUE U/S. ITA NO. 358/A/2010 3 13(3) OF THE IT ACT NOTED THAT NO SPECIFIC DISALLOW ANCE HAS BEEN MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER THIS PROVISION. THEREFORE, T HE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSE SSEE WAS ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. 3. THE LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER. HOWEVER, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE NOTIFYIN G THE DATE OF HEARING. THE ASSESSEE IS, THEREFORE, PROCEEDED EXPARTE. 4. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A), WE DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFICATION TO INTERFE RE WITH THE IMPUGNED ORDER. IN THIS CASE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER DENIED BENEFIT OF SECTION 11 OF THE IT ACT IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BECAUSE REGISTRATION GRANTED U/S. 1 2AA HAS BEEN CANCELLED BY THE CIT, VARANASI U/S. 12AA(3) OF THE IT ACT. THE TRIBU NAL, HOWEVER, SET ASIDE THE ORDER U/S. 12AA(3) OF THE ACT AND REGISTRATION WAS RESTORED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS VALID REGISTRATION U/S. 12AA OF THE IT ACT, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE WOULD BE ENTITLED FOR EXEMP TION U/S. 11 OF THE IT ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO IN THE REMAND REPORT ADMITTE D BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THAT IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, NOW THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED FOR BENEFIT OF SECTION 11 OF THE IT ACT. FURTHER, NO SPECIFIC DISALLOWANCE HAS BEEN MAD E BY APPLYING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(3) OF THE IT ACT. THE LD. CIT(A) IN VIEW OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL ITA NO. 358/A/2010 4 WAS JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTIT LED FOR DEDUCTION U/S. 11 OF THE IT ACT. WE, THEREFORE, DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN TH E ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN ALLOWING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. CONSEQUENTLY, THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL FAILS AND IS DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS DISMIS SED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (A.L. GEHLOT) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *AKS/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A), CONCERNED BY ORDER 4. CIT, CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, ALLAHABAD 6. GUARD FILE ASSTT. REGISTRAR TRUE COPY