The Income-tax Officer, Srinagar V. M/s. J.K. Public Shcool, Srinagar

ITA 387/ASR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 38720914 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 04-09-2014
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 10-06-2013
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: M A MIR COST ACCOUNTANT
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure; Loose papers; Charitable institution; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 133A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. A.D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. B.P.JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.387(ASR)/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2009-10 PAN :AABTJ1255B INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. M/S. J.K. PUBLIC SCHOOL, WARD-1, SRINAGAR. HUMHAMA, SRINAGAR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY:SH.TARSEM LAL, RESPONDENT BY:SH.M.A.MIR, COST ACCOUNTANT DATE OF HEARING: 04/09/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:11/09/2014 ORDER PER B.P.JAIN, AM ; THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE ARISES FROM THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), JAMMU DATED 18.03.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 009-10 .THE REVENUE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) WAS RIGHT IN ALLOWING EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C) (IIIAD) OF THE I.T.ACT, 1961, WHEN THE GROSS RECEIPT OF THE ASSESSEE AS PER THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT IMPOUNDED DURING SURVEY CONDUCTED ON 03.03. 2009 EXCEED RS. 1 CRORE WHICH INCLUDED TUITION FEE RECEI PTS, BUS FEE RECEIPT AND HOSTEL FEE RECEIPTS AND THE ASSESSEE WA S UNDER OBLIGATION TO APPLY AND OBTAIN REGISTRATION FROM WO RTHY CCIT, AMRITSAR U/S 10(23C)(IIIAD) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. ITA NO.387(ASR)/2013 2 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WHETHER THE LD. C IT(A) WAS RIGHT IN ALLOWING EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C) (IIIAD) OF THE I.T.ACT, 1961 ON THE GROUND THAT THERE IS NO HOSTEL BUILDING AND NO SUCH HOSTEL INCOME WHEREAS THE DOCUMENTS IMPOUNDED DURIN G SURVEY OPERATION ON 03.03.2009 MENTION HOSTEL INCOME OF RS.9,25,000/-. 3. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WHETHER THE LD. C IT(A) WAS RIGHT IN ALLOWING EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C) (IIIAD) OF THE I.T.ACT, 1961, ON THE GROUND THAT THE BUS FEE RECEIPT IS INC LUDED IN THE TUITION FEE OF RS.74,08,292/- WHERE AS PER THE BOOK S OF ACCOUNT IMPOUNDED DURING SURVEY CONDUCTED ON 03.03.2009 MEN TION TUITION FEE RECEIPTS AT RS.64,49,700/- & BUS FEE RE CEIPTS AT RS.28,80,750/-. 4. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WHETHER THE LD. C IT(A) WAS RIGHT IN ALLOWING EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C) (IIIAD) OF THE I.T.ACT, 1961 WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO DISCLOSE RENTA L INCOME EARNED BY IT FOR LETTING OUT OF SHOPS AT RS.6,27,30 0/-. 5. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WHETHER THE LD. C IT(A) WAS RIGHT IN ALLOWING EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C) (IIIAD) OF THE I.T.ACT, 1961 WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO FURNISH EXPLAN ATION REGARDING NATURE AND TO WHOM THE LOAN AND ADVANCES OF RS.19,12,293/- HAVE BEEN MADE. 6. THE APPELLANT CRAVES TO AMEND OF ADD ANY ONE MOR E GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT SURVEY UNDE R SECTION 133A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 WAS CONDUCTED ON 03.03.2009 AT THE BUSINESS PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE. BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND OTHE R DOCUMENTS WERE IMPOUNDED INCLUDING LOOSE PAPERS, BUDGET FILE AND OTHER MISC. DOCUMENTS. THE ASSESSEE HAD DECLARED NIL INCOME AFTER CLAIMI NG RS.26,82,387/- ITA NO.387(ASR)/2013 3 EXEMPT U/S 10(23C)(IIIAD) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE IN TOTAL RECEIPTS AND EXPENDITURE A S PER THE IMPOUNDED DOCUMENTS AND AS PER BOOKS OF ACCOUNT FURNISHED. T HE ASSESSEE IS A SCHOOL, NOT REGISTERED AS A CHARITABLE TRUST U/S 12A(A) OF THE ACT AND NOT REGISTERED U/S 10(23C) WITH THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX. IN THE RETURN OF INCOME, THE ASSESSEE HAD DECLARED GROSS RECEIPTS AT RS.74,08392/-, WHICH REPRESENTS ONLY TUITION FEE. HOWEVER, THE ANNEXURE AS-4 TITLED AS BUDGET FILE OF THE IMPOUNDED MATERIAL AND ANOTHER ANNEXUR E BS-1 WHICH IS A REGISTER OF MONTHLY SUMMARY OF FEE, DEPICT TOTAL RE CEIPTS IN EXCESS OF RS. 1 CRORE. AS PER THE IMPOUNDED DOCUMENTS, THE AO WORK ED OUT THE GROSS RECEIPTS AS UNDER: S.NO. NATURE OF RECEIPT AMOUNT IN RS. 1. GROSS RECEIPTS DECLARED IN THE RETURN (TUITION FEE) 74,08,392/- 2. BUS FEE 28,80,750/- 3. HOSTEL INCOME 9,25,000/- RENTAL INCOME 6,27,300/- GROSS RECEIPTS FOR THE YEAR 1,18,41,442/- ITA NO.387(ASR)/2013 4 2.1. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EXPLANATION BY THE ASSES SEE, THE AO OBSERVED THAT THERE IS NO PROPER MAINTENANCE OF BOOKS OF ACC OUNT AND ACCORDINGLY, HE INVOKED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145(3) OF THE AC T. 2.2. ON THE GROSS RECEIPTS DECLARED AT RS.74,09,392 /-, THE ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED EXCESS OF INCOME OVER EXPENDITURE AT RS.26 ,82,387/-. FROM THE IMPOUNDED DOCUMENTS, THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSES SEE HAS EARNED BUS RECEIPTS OF RS.28,80,750/- AND HOSTEL RECEIPTS OF R S.9,25,000/-, TOTALING RS.38,10,750/- AND THE AO AFTER ALLOWING REASONABLE EXPENDITURE WORKED OUT NET PROFIT @ 20% AT RS.7,62,150/- AND ADDED THE SAME TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 2.3. FROM THE IMPOUNDED DOCUMENTS, THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DECLARED RENTAL INCOME FROM LETTING OUT OF SHOPS AT RS.6,27,000/- AND ACCORDINGLY, THE AO AFTER ALLOWING DEDUCTION U/S 2 4(A) @ 30% AT RS.1,88,190/- COMPUTED THE INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPER TY AT RS.4,39,110/- AND ADDED THE SAME TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 2.4. THE ASSESSEE HAD ADVANCED LOANS OF RS.19,12,29 3/- AND NO EXPLANATION TO THAT EXTENT WAS FURNISHED BY THE ASS ESSEE AND ACCORDINGLY THE SAME WAS ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE A O ALSO ADDED RS.49,028/- U/S 68 OF THE ACT BEING EXCESS CREDIT I N THE BALANCE SHEET VIDE PARA 5.4 OF HIS ORDER AND ASSESSED THE INCOME AT RS .58,44,968/-. THE AO ITA NO.387(ASR)/2013 5 ULTIMATELY DENIED THE ASSESSEE THE BENEFIT OF SECTI ON 10(23C)(IIIAD) OF THE ACT, AS CLAIMED . 3. BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE MADE SUBMISS IONS DATED 21.02.2013 AND 07.03.2013. IN THE SUBMISSIONS DATED 21.02.2013, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE DOCUMENTS IMPOUNDED ARE BUDGETED FIGURE AND THEREFORE, THE AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN REJECTING TH E BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. FURTHER, THE AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN NOT ALLOWING E XEMPTION U/S 10(23C)(IIIAD) OF THE ACT. AS REGARDS HOSTEL INCOM E, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) VIDE PARA 3B.3 OF CIT(A)S OR DER THAT THE AO HAS RELIED ON THE BUDGETED ESTIMATES OF BUS AND HOSTEL, WHICH IS UNWARRANTED. BUT VIDE SUBMISSIONS DATED 07.03.2013, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE TOTAL FEES INCLUDES TUITION FEE AALONGWITH THE BUS FEE AN D ASSESSEE DID NOT MAINTAIN ANY HOSTEL DURING THE IMPUGNED YEAR.. AS R EGARDS THE INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT IT PERT AINS TO DIFFERENT ASSESSEES. REGARDING ADDITION OF RS.19,12,293/-, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE SAID AMOUNT IS FOR ADVANCE FOR PURCHASE OF FIXED ASSETS AND RS.49028/- IS THE DIFFERENCE IN THE LOAN ACCOUNT AND BALANCE AS PER BANK STATEMENT. 3.1. THE LD. CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIO NS OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ALLOWED EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C) OF THE ACT BY ACCEPTI NG THE EXPLANATION OF ITA NO.387(ASR)/2013 6 THE ASSESSEE AND THE RELEVANT FINDINGS OF THE LD. C IT(A) IN PARAS 4.1 TO 4.3. ARE REPRODUCED FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE AS UNDER : I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT AND FINDINGS OF THE AO IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE ENTIRE ADDITION AN D WITHDRAWAL OF EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C) IS BASED ON THE INTERPRETATIO N OF THE DOCUMENT DISCOVERED DURING THE SURVEY OPERATION ON THE APPEL LANT. THE AO IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PAGE 3 HAS OBSERVED THAT IF GR OSS RECEIPTS OF RS.74,08,392/- (DECLARED IN THE RETURN AS TUITION FEE) BUS FEE OF RS.28,80,750/-, HOSTEL INCOME OF RS.9,25,000/- AND RENTAL INCOME OF RS.6,27,300/-) ARE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT, THE GROSS RE CEIPTS FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION COMES TO RS.1,18,41,442/-. PERU SAL OF THE DOCUMENT OBTAINED DURING THE SURVEY OPERATION CLEAR LY REVEALS THAT THESE ARE BUDGETED FIGURES FOR THE YEAR 2008-09. IT IS VERY CLEARLY WRITTEN ON THE TOP OF THE DOCUMENT AS SCHOOL BUDGET 2008-09. THIS IS APPARENTLY A PROJECTION AND NOT THE REAL INCOME. TH E BUDGETED FIGURE OF INCOME AND EXPENDITURE FOR VARIOUS HEADS ARE AS UNDER: 1. SCHOOL BUDGET:INCOME OF RS.64,49,700/-, EXPENDIT URE OF RS.64,81,784/- 2. BUS BUDGET INCOME OF RS.28,80,750/-, EXPENDITUR E OF RS.33,33,600/- 3. HOSTEL BUYDGETINCOME OF RS.9,25,000/-, EXPENDIT URE OF RS.10,16,800/-. THE AO HAS IGNORED THE EXPENDITURE FIGURES WHICH AR E HIGHER THAT INCOME WHILE COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT. 4.2. THE SCHOOL BUDGET FIGURE STATED ABOVE REVEALS TOTAL INCOME OF RS.64,49,700/- WHEREAS THE APPELLANT HAS SHOWN RECE IPT OF RS.74,08,392/-. THE AO HAS TAKEN THE HIGHER FIGURE AND ADDED ON TOP OF IT THE BUDGET ESTIMATE OF BUS INCOME AND HOSTEL INCOME AND ARRIVED AT THE FIGURE OF RECEIPT BEYOND RS.1 CRORE AND DENIED EXEMPTION. TAKING TWO FIGURES FROM TWO D IFFERENT BASKETS DOES NOT APPEAL TO LOGIC. THE APPELLANT IN HIS SUBMISSION DT. 07.03.2013 HAS STATED THAT THE TUITI ON FEE RECEIPT OF RS.74,08,392/- INCLUDED BUS FEE BUT NOT HOSTEL F EE BECAUSE NO HOSTEL WAS MAINTAINED. DUE TO THIS REASON THE SCHOO L BUDGET FIGURE IS LESSER THAN THE TOTAL FEE SHOWN. I FIND F ORCE IN HIS ITA NO.387(ASR)/2013 7 SUBMISSION. FURTHER, PERUSAL OF RECEIPT AND PAYMENT ACCOUNT OF J.K.PUBLIC SCHOOL FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31.03.2009 RE VEALS THAT THE APPELLANT HAS SHOWN EXPENDITURE ON HIRING OF VE HICLE FOR RS.8,40,530/- WHICH IS EXPENDITURE ON BUS CHARGES. THIS SUGGEST THAT THE APPELLANT HAS REFLECTED RS.74,08,392/- AS TOTAL FEE RECEIPT INCLUDING TUITION FEE AND BUS FEE. SINCE CO RRESPONDING EXPENDITURE ON BUS CHARGES IS DEBITED I THE INCOME EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT HIS MAKE SENSE THAT THE AMOUNT OF TUITION F EE IS INCLUSIVE OF BUS CHARGES. REGARDING HOSTEL CHARGES AND OTHER RECEIPTS, THEY TOGETHER CAN NOT MAKE THE FIGURE EXC EED RS.1 CRORE. MOREOVER, THE APPELLANT DENIED TO HAVE MENTI ONED ANY HOSTEL AND THE OUTCOME OF SURVEY ALSO DID NOT INDIC ATE THE EXISTENCE OF ANY HOSTEL BUILDING. FROM ABOVE DISCUS SION IT IS INFERRED THAT THE BUDGET DOCUMENT IS NOT THE REAL INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT. EVERY HEAD WHETHER IT BE SCHOO L BUDGET, BUS BUDGET OR HOSTEL BUDGET HAD DEFICIT BECAUSE EX PENDITURE WAS MORE THAN THE INCOME. PLACING RELIANCE ON THE I MPOUNDED BUDGETED DOCUMENT DURING SURVEY IS NOT ENOUGH TO DI SALLOW EXEMPTION U/S10(23C)(IIIAD) UNLESS CORROBORATED BY INDEPENDENT ENQUIRY. THE AO HAS NOT ESTABLISHED THR OUGH ENQUIRY THAT THE IMPOUNDED DOCUMENT REFLECTED REAL INCOME AND NOT A MERE PROJECTION. I AM OF THE OPINION THAT WITHDRAWAL OF EXEMPTION IS NOT IN ORDER ON THE BASIS OF A DOCU MENT FROM WHICH NO CONCLUSIVE PROOF CAN BE ARRIVED AT AND I H OLD ACCORDINGLY. THIS GROUND OF THE APPELLANT IS ALLOWE D. 4.3. WHEN THE EXEMPTION IS DENIED, THE AO HAS MADE SEVER AL ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF RECEIPT FROM BUS FEE, HOSTEL FEE, INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY, UNACCOUNTED EXPENDITURE AND CA SH CREDIT. SINCE THE EXEMPTION IS RESTORED THE OTHER G ROUNDS OF ADDITIONS BECOME IRRELEVANT AND NOT REQUIRED TO BE DISCUSSED. IN EFFECT THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED. 4. THE LD. DR, MR. TARSEM LAL, SUBMITTED A PAPER B OOK CONTAINING COPIES OF IMPOUNDED DOCUMENTS AND POINTED OUT THA T ALL THE PAPERS ARE SIGNED BY THE ACCOUNTANT, OFFICE INCHARGE AND SECRE TARY OF THE ASSESSEE- SCHOOL. BY NO STRETCH OF IMAGINATION, THE SAID FIG URE CAN BE SAID TO BE ITA NO.387(ASR)/2013 8 BUDGETED FIGURE EVEN IF AT THE FRONT PAGE IT IS MEN TIONED AS BUDGET ESTIMATES. THE DOCUMENT WITH REGARD TO BUS INCOME REFERS TO TH E NUMBER OF STUDENTS CARRIED BY THE BUS FROM DIFFERENT PLACES AND CHARG ES AGAINST EACH ROUTE. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ACCEPTED THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSES SEE SIMPLY WITHOUT REBUTTING THE SAME TO THE A.O. OR WITHOUT MAKING A NY ENQUIRY OF WHATSOEVER KIND. THE CONTROVERSY IN THE SUBMISSION MADE BY THE ASSESSEE, WHICH IS PART OF LD. CIT(A)S ORDER WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMI TTED THAT IT DOES NOT MAINTAIN ANY HOSTEL WHEREAS IN THE FINDINGS BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN PARA 4.1, THE ASSESSEE HAS INCURRED EXPENDITURE OF RS.33,33,600/- AS AGAINST INCOME FROM BUS AT RS.28,80,750/-, EXPENDITURE OF RS.10,16,800/ - AGAINST INCOME OF HOSTEL AT RS.9,25,000/- AND RS.64,81,874/- AS AGAIN ST INCOME OF SCHOOL AT RS.64,49,700/-. THE TOTAL EXPENDITURE OF SCHOOL, BU S AND HOSTEL IN PARA 4.1 OF LD. CIT(A)S ORDER COMES AT RS.1,08,32,184/-, WHICH IS THE ACTUAL EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE, APART FROM AD VANCES OF RS.19,12,293/- MADE AND REMAINED UNEXPLANED. THIS ITSELF SHOWS THA T THE ASSESSEE IS HAVING RECEIPT OF MORE THAN RS. 1 CRORE. ON ONE HAND, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT IT DOES NOT MAINTAIN ANY HOSTEL AND ON THE OTH ER HAND, IT IS HAVING EXPENDITURE ON HOSTEL AT RS.33,33,600/- DURING TH E YEAR VIDE PARA 4.1 OF LD. CIT(A)S ORDER. THE LD. DR ARGUED THAT THE ORDE R OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS PERVERSE AND PRAYED TO REVERSE THE SAME AND RESTORE THAT OF THE A.O. ITA NO.387(ASR)/2013 9 5 THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, MR. M.A. MIR, O N THE OTHER HAND, ARGUED THAT THE IMPOUNDED DOCUMENTS ARE HAVING MANY PAGES AND THE FIRST PAGE REFERS TO BUDGETED FIGURES AND THEREFORE, THE AO IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN TREATING THE SAME AS ACTUAL FIGURE ESPECIALLY AFTER REJECTING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT MAINTAIN ANY HOSTEL IN THE IMPUGNED YEAR. MR. M.A. MIR, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUP PORTED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE FACTS OF THE CASE. DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT IMPOUNDED CERTAIN DOCUMENTS WHICH INCLUDED LOOSE PAPERS AND THE FRONT PAGE OF THE LOOSE PAPER WAS TITLED AS BUDGET FILE. IN FACT, DURING ASSES SMENT PROCEEDINGS NO EXPLANATION HAS BEEN GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE QUERY RAISED BY THE AO. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, THE AO HAD TO CONSIDE R THE FIGURES IN THE IMPOUNDED DOCUMENTS AS ACTUAL FIGURES FOR COMPUTING THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE FIGURES IN THE IMPOUN DED DOCUMENTS WERE NOT RECONCILED FROM THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE, THOUGH HE HAD THE OPTION TO MAKE ENQUIRIES BUT THE SAME WAS N OT DONE. 6.1. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE MADE SUBMISSION BEFOR E THE LD. CIT(A) WHERE IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT MAINTAIN ING ANY HOSTEL AND BUS FEE IS INCLUDED IN THE TUITION FEE. THE SUBMISSIONS MAD E BY THE ASSESSEE HAS ITA NO.387(ASR)/2013 10 BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND EXEMPTION U/S 1 0(23C)(IIIAD), AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT MAKING ANY ENQUIRY OR WITHOUT DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE ON RECORD A ND EVEN WITHOUT REBUTTING THE SUBMISSIONS OF ASSESSEE TO AO. AS RE GARDS THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THE TOTAL RECEIP TS AS TUITION FEE IS RS.74,08,392, WHICH INCLUDES BUS RECEIPTS, WAS ACCE PTED AS IT IS WITHOUT MAKING ANY ENQUIRY. BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSE SSEE SUBMITTED THAT INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY AMOUNTING TO RS.4,39,110 /- PERTAINS TO DIFFERENT ASSESSEES HAS ALSO BEEN ACCEPTED WITHOUT BRINGING ON RECORD WHICH INCOME PERTAINS TO WHICH ASSESSEE AND THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) IS NON- SPEAKING IN THIS REGARD. THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO ACCEPT ED THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE WITH REGARD TO THE ADDITION OF RS.19,12,29 3/-, WHICH HAS BEEN SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE SAME IS ADVANCE D FOR PURCHASE OF FIXED ASSETS, IN THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO PRO VE THAT THE ADVANCE HAS ACTUALLY BEEN GIVEN AS CLAIMED AND THE ORDER IS NON -SPEAKING TO THIS EXTENT. WITH REGARD TO ADDITION OF RS.49,028/-, IT WAS SUB MITTED THAT IT IS A RECONCILIATION OF THE DIFFERENCE IN THE LOAN AMOUNT AND AS PER BANK STATEMENT WITHOUT BRINGING ON RECORD RECONCILIATION STATEMENT , SUBMISSION HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE LD. CIT(A), WITHOUT SPEAKING A WORD IN HIS ORDER. FROM THE READING OF THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, REPRODU CED IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. ITA NO.387(ASR)/2013 11 CIT(A) AND FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A), IT APPEARS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ACCEPTED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE IN TOTO WI THOUT PASSING A SPEAKING ORDER AND WITHOUT MAKING ANY INQUIRY OF WHATSOEVER KIND. 6.2. MOREOVER, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GIVEN A FINDING I N PARA 4.1 OF HIS ORDER WITH REGARD TO THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED DURING THE YEAR AS UNDER: I) SCHOOL EXPENDITURE RS.64,81,784/- II) BUS EXPENDITURE RS.33,33,600/- III) HOSTEL BUDGET RS.10,16,800/- TOTAL : RS.1,08,32,184/- APART FROM THIS, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ACCEPTED RS.1 9,12,293/- GIVEN AS ADVANCE FOR THE PURCHASE OF FIXED ASSETS AND IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY FINDING TO THE CONTRARY, THE SAME CAN BE PRESUMED TO HAVE B EEN GIVEN DURING THE IMPUGNED YEAR, WHICH MAKES THE TOTAL OUT GO AT R S.1,27,44,477/- DURING THE IMPUGNED YEAR. THEREFORE, TO THIS EXTENT, THE A SSESSEE CAN BE PRESUMED TO HAVE EARNED THE GROSS RECEIPTS DURING THE IMPUGNED YEAR. THIS FINDING OF THE EXPENDITURE BY THE LD. CIT(A) CLEARLY SHOWS THE RE CEIPTS OF THE ASSESSEES SCHOOL ARE MORE THAN RS. 1 CRORE. ALSO, AS PER THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE DATED 07.03.2013 IN PARA 3C OF LD. CIT(A)S ORDER, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED OF NOT HAVING MAINTAINED ANY HOSTEL WHEREAS THE LD . CIT(A) IN PARA 4.1 REPRODUCED AND DISCUSSED HEREINABOVE SHOWS THE HO STEL EXPENDITURE DURING THE IMPUGNED YEAR IS AT RS.10,16,800/-. IT APPEARS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALLOWED THE RELIEF OF JUST ACCEPTING THE SUBMISSIO N OF THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO.387(ASR)/2013 12 ACCORDINGLY, THE LD. CIT(A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN ALL OWING EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C)(IIIAD) OF THE ACT, AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESS EE . HOWEVER, DECISION HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE LD. CIT(A) WITHOUT MAKING ANY ENQUIRY AND WITHOUT REBUTTING THE AO ON THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASS ESSEE BEFORE HIM, IT WILL BE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, IF THE MATTER IS REM ANDED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, WHO WILL MAKE THE ENQUIRY WITH R EGARD TO THE TUITION FEE, BUS FEE AND HOSTEL FEE ETC., IN DETAIL AND DECIDE THE ISSUE ACCORDINGLY DENOVO BUT AFTER AFFORDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, THE MATTER IS SET ASIDE TO T HE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DECIDING THE ISSUE DENOVO IN TERMS OF O UR FINDINGS, HEREINABOVE. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.387(ASR)/2013 IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11TH SEPTEMBER, 2014. SD/- SD/- (A.D.JAIN) (B.P. JAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 11TH SEPTEMBER, 2014 /SKR/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE:M/S. J.K. PUBLIC SCHOOL, SRINAGAR. 2. THE ITO WARD 3(1), SGR. 3. THE CIT(A), JAMMU. 4. THE CIT, JAMMU 5. THE SR DR, ITAT, AMRITSAR. TRUE COPY BY ORDER