M/S SWAMI VIVEKANAND EDUCATIONAL & WELFARE SOCIETY, SHERPUR V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

ITA 422/ASR/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7980 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-04-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 03-04-2018
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 22-06-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRITHI PAL
• Assessee Lawyers: YASH PAUL GOYAL
• Keywords: Depreciation; Source of fund; Competent authority
• Section: 12AA; 12; 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. N. K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 422/(ASR)/2017 AS SESSMENT YEAR: 2017-18 SWAMI VIVEKANAND EDUCATIONAL & WELFARE SOCIETY, VILL. RAMNAGAR CHANNA, KATRON MANAL ROAD, TEHSIL SHERPUR [PAN: AAHAS 4523N] VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. YASH PAUL GOYAL (ADV .) RESPONDENT BY: SH. PRITHI PAL, CIT- D.R. DATE OF HEARING: 03.04.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 20.04.2018 ORDER PER SANJAY ARORA, AM: THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE CONTESTING THE OR DER U/S. 12AA(1)(B)(II) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ('THE ACT' HEREINAFTER) DATED 31.05.2017 BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH ('CIT(E)' FOR SHORT, OR THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY), DENYING THE ASSESSEE REGISTRA TION U/S. 12AA OF THE ACT. 2. THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY, FORMED AND REGISTERED AS S UCH ON NOVEMBER 8, 2011, APPLIED FOR REGISTRATION U/S. 12AA IN THE PRESCRIBE D FORM ON 30.11.2016. THE ONLY ACTIVITY, AS STATED, PURSUED BY IT SINCE INCEPTION IS RUNNING A SCHOOL BY THE NAME THE LORDS SCHOOL AT KATRON, MANAL ROAD, VILLAGE R AMNAGAR CHANNA, TEHSIL ITA NO. 422 (ASR)/2017(AY 2017-18) SWAMI VIVEKANA ND EDUCATIONAL V. CIT(E) 2 SHERPUR, WHICH STARTED ITS FIRST ACADEMIC SESSION FROM 01.04.2013 (REFER PARA 16 OF THE ASSESSEES REPLY DATED 18.05.2017, AT PB PGS. 7 7-78, AND PB PG. 85). THOUGH INITIALLY THE SOCIETY HAD VARIED OBJECTS IN ITS MEM ORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION (MOA), VIDE SUPPLEMENTARY DEED DATED 14.09.2016 (PB PGS. 1 4-26), THE SAME WAS RESTRICTED ONLY TO PROVIDING EDUCATION TO ALL PERSO NS IRRESPECTIVE OF THEIR CASTE, CREED OR RELIGION. ALL THE OTHER AIMS AND OBJECTS W ERE DECLARED AS OMITTED. OTHER NOTABLE AMENDMENTS WERE BY WAY OF THAT TO CLAUSE 10 OF ITS CHARTER, WHEREBY THE ASSETS OF THE SOCIETY AS ON THE DATE OF ITS DISSOLU TION WOULD BE TRANSFERRED TO A TRUST OR SOCIETY WITH SIMILAR OBJECTS AS THE ASSESSEE-SOC IETY, AND NO PART THEREOF SHALL ACCRUE TO THE MEMBERS OF THE GOVERNING BODY OF TH E SOCIETY. LIKEWISE, FOR ITS CORPUS FUNDS. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEES FUNDS WERE TO BE DEPLOYED FOR ITS OBJECTS, AND THAT SURPLUS WITH IT FOR THE TIME BEING INVESTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND THE RULES MADE THERE-UNDER. THE NATURE OF THE SOCIETY WAS TO BE A NON- PROFIT SOCIETY, EXISTING SOLELY FOR PHILANTHROPIC P URPOSES AND NOT FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROFIT. FOR THE FINANCIAL YEARS (F.YS.) 2013-14 TO 2015-16, THE ASSESSEES GROSS RECEIPT BEING BELOW RS.100 LACS, IT CLAIMED EXEMPTI ON ON ITS ENTIRE INCOME U/S. 10(23C)(IIIAD). AS, HOWEVER, ITS GROSS RECEIPT WAS LIKELY TO EXCEED RS.100 LACS THEREAFTER, PRECLUDING SECTION 10(23C)(IIIAD), SO T HAT IT WOULD NOW REQUIRE BEING APPROVED U/S. 10(23C)(VI), WHICH READS AS UNDER, TH E ASSESSEE PREFERRED INSTEAD TO BE REGISTERED U/S. 12AA: INCOMES NOT INCLUDED IN TOTAL INCOME. 10. IN COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME OF A PREVIOUS YEAR O F ANY PERSON, ANY INCOME FALLING WITHIN ANY OF THE FOLLOWING CLAUSES SHALL NO BE INC LUDED (23C) ANY INCOME RECEIVED BY ANY PERSON ON BEHALF O F ITA NO. 422 (ASR)/2017(AY 2017-18) SWAMI VIVEKANA ND EDUCATIONAL V. CIT(E) 3 (VI) ANY UNIVERSITY OR OTHER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIO N EXISTING SOLELY FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES AND NOT FOR PURPOSES OF PROFIT, OTHER THAN THOSE ME NTIONED IN SUB-CLAUSE ( IIIAB ) OR SUB-CLAUSE ( IIIAD ) AND WHICH MAY BE APPROVED BY THE PRESCRIBED AUTHO RITY ; OR THIS DID NOT MEET THE APPROVAL OF THE COMPETENT AUT HORITY. THE TWO, I.E., SECTION 10(23C)(VI) AND SECTIONS 11 AND 12 (REQUIRING, PER SECTION 12A, RE GISTRATION U/S. 12AA), REPRESENTED DIFFERENT AND SEPARATE CODES UND ER THE ACT. IT WAS NOT PERMISSIBLE TO CHANGE TRACK MID-WAY, FOR WHICH NO R ATIONALE HAD BEEN FURNISHED. THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY RE VEALED IT TO HAVE SOURCES OF INCOME OTHER THAN FROM THE SCHOOL, WHICH HAD THUS N OT BEEN DIVULGED. CLEARLY, THEREFORE, THE SOCIETY HAD PURSUED ACTIVITIES, I.E. , APART FROM SCHOOL, WHICH HAD NOT BEEN DISCLOSED, AND WHICH WAS ALSO APPARENT FROM TH E VARIATION IN THE VALUE OF FIXED ASSETS OF THE SOCIETY (AS A WHOLE) AS COMPARE D WITH THAT OF THE SCHOOL ALONE. THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO ISSUED A PERFUNCTORY RESPONSE TO THE REQUIREMENT OF FURNISHING DETAILS OF CASH DEPOSITS IN BANK, I.E., POST NOVEMBER 8, 2016, I.E., WHEN THE DEMONETARIZATION CAME INTO EFFECT, EXHIBITING I TS RELUCTANCE TO DIVULGE DETAILS OF ITS ACTIVITIES, AND WHICH THEREFORE SEVERELY IMP INGED ON THE EFFORTS TO EXAMINE THE GENUINENESS OF ITS ACTIVITIES. THE SCHOOL WAS ALSO CHARGING, APART FROM TUITION FEE, FEES UNDER VARIOUS HEADS, VIZ. ADMISSION FEE, REGISTRATION FEE, DEVELOPMENT FUND, TRANSPORT CHARGES, ETC., INDICATING IT TO BE FOR PROFIT. THE REGISTRATION WAS ACCORDINGLY DENIED, SO THAT, AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSE E IS IN APPEAL. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES, AND PERUSED THE MATER IAL ON RECORD. OUR FIRST OBSERVATION IS THAT THERE IS NOTHING ON R ECORD TO INDICATE THAT THE SUPPLEMENTARY DEED DATED 14.09.2016 IS REGISTERED, WHICH IS TO BE WITH THE OFFICE OF THE ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR, DISTT. SHERPUR, MANAL (SANGRUR), I.E., THE AUTHORITY ISSUING THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION (THE SAID A UTHORITY WORKING, AS WE UNDERSTAND, UNDER THE AEGIS OF THE REGISTRAR OF FIRMS AND SOCIE TIES, CHANDIGARH). THE ITA NO. 422 (ASR)/2017(AY 2017-18) SWAMI VIVEKANA ND EDUCATIONAL V. CIT(E) 4 AMENDMENTS PER THE SUPPLEMENTARY DEED WOULD TAKE EF FECT, EVEN IF FROM THE DATE OF THE SAID DEED ITSELF, ONLY UPON ITS REGISTRATION . THE ONLY OTHER ASPECT CONSIDERED UNTENABLE BY US, REQUIRING CONSIDERATION, IS QUA THE SCHOOL BUILDING, BEING SITUATE ON A LEASEHOLD LAND. THIS IS AS THE LEASE, BEGINNIN G 16/2/2012, IS FOR A PERIOD OF 30 YEARS (PB PGS. 88-101, WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION AT PB PGS. 88A,89A). THE LESSORS, WHO ARE THE FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE FOUNDER MEMBERS O F THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY, ARE, AS PER THE LEASE-DEED, ENTITLED TO TAKE BACK THE PO SSESSION OF THE LAND AT THE END OF THE LEASE PERIOD. HOW WOULD THE SCHOOL BUILDING, CO NSTITUTING THE PRINCIPAL ASSET OF THE SOCIETY, BE THEN TAKEN POSSESSION OF BY IT AT T HE END OF THE LEASE TERM? IN FACT, THIS EVENTUALITY COULD OCCUR EVEN EARLIER, WHERE TH E LAND IS RESUMED, AS ON ACCOUNT OF NON-PAYMENT OF LEASE RENT, WHICH AS PER THE FINA NCIAL ACCOUNTS IS UNPAID UP TO 31.03.2016 (ENCLOSED AS A PART OF THE PAPER-BOOK). OF THE FIXED ASSETS OF RS.121.32 LACS (AS ON 31.03.2016), BUILDING (INCLUDING BUILDI NG-UNDER-CONSTRUCTION) IS AT RS.71.92 LACS (PB PGS. 69,70). THE SAME IS, AS CLAR IFIED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, MR. GOYAL, LIKELY TO WITNESS AN INCREASE FROM YEAR TO YEAR AS THE SCHOOL, PRESENTLY UPTO CLASS 7, WOULD GO UP TO CLASS 12, WI TH ONE CLASS BEING ADDED EACH YEAR. ALL THE OTHER ASSETS (OTHER THAN FURNITURE AT TACHED AND FORMING PART OF THE BUILDING) COULD BE REMOVED AND RELOCATED. THE ASSES SEE-SOCIETYS PRINCIPAL ASSET WOULD UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES NOT ONLY BE LOST TO I T, BUT STAND TO BE PASSED TO PERSONS WHO HAVE FOUNDED THE SAME. THIS, THEN, UNWI TTINGLY PERHAPS, BECOMES A MECHANISM FOR THE TRANSFER OF ASSETS/WEALTH OF THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY THERETO! THE DISSOLUTION CLAUSES, READ OUT BY SH. GOYAL, ON BEIN G QUESTIONED IN THIS RESPECT, WOULD NOT BE OF MUCH ASSISTANCE TO THE ASSESSEE-SOC IETY AS THE SCHOOL BUILDING, BEING FIXED TO THE LAND, COULD NOT BE TRANSFERRED T O ANY OTHER SOCIETY (WITH SIMILAR OBJECTS) EITHER DURING THE CURRENCY OR EVEN AT THE END OF THE LEASE PERIOD. WE OBSERVE THIS TO BE A SERIOUS STRUCTURAL DEFECT IN T HE ASSESSEES FUNCTIONING, ADVERSELY IMPACTING ITS FUNCTIONING AND, THUS, THE GENUINENESS OF ITS ACTIVITIES. THE ITA NO. 422 (ASR)/2017(AY 2017-18) SWAMI VIVEKANA ND EDUCATIONAL V. CIT(E) 5 TRANSFER OF THE PROPERTY OF THE SOCIETY TO OTHERS LIKELY TO BE PERSONS HAVING FOUNDED THE SAME OR THEIR RELATIVES, WITHOUT THE AS SESSEEE BEING SUITABLY COMPENSATED THEREFOR, IS A DISTINCT POSSIBILITY. RA THER, THE SOCIETY OUGHT TO BE SUITABLY COMPENSATED FOR THE GOODWILL IN THE EVENT OF IT BEING UNABLE TO CONTINUE TO RUN THE SCHOOL BEYOND THE LEASE TERM, FROM THE PERS ONS WHO MAY UNDERTAKE TO RUN IT THEREAFTER BEING BY THEN (PRESUMABLY) WELL EST ABLISHED. MR. GOYAL WOULD FURTHER STATE THAT THE LESSORS COULD FURNISH AN UND ERTAKING THAT THE LEASE SHALL BE RENEWED, ETC. OR THE SOCIETY SUITABLY COMPENSATED F OR THE BUILDING. HOWEVER, ON BEING ASKED ABOUT THE LEGAL SANCTITY OF SUCH AN UND ERTAKING, HE COULD NOT FURNISH ANY SATISFACTORY ANSWER. WHY, THE LEASE RENT, WHICH IS A REASONABLE SUM AT PRESENT, MAY STAND INCREASED MANIFOLD BY THE LESSORS AS A CO NDITION FOR THE RENEWAL OF THE LEASE! WE ARE NOT, WE MAY CLARIFY, RAISING A FALSE ALARM THE INCIDENT NOT LIKELY TO OCCUR IN RECENT FUTURE THE SCHOOL BEING AT A NASC ENT STAGE, BUT POINTING TO WHAT IS IMMINENT, INASMUCH AS THE LEASE WOULD EXPIRE AT THE END OF ITS TERM, WITH NO MECHANISM IN PLACE FOR THE RESTORATION OF THE SCHOO L BUILDING, OR ITS VALUE, FORMING A PREDOMINANT PART OF THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETYS CAPITA L. 4. APART FROM THE FOREGOING, WE DO NOT, AS OBSERVED EARLIER, FIND ANY MERIT IN ANY OF THE SEVERAL OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE COMPETE NT AUTHORITY, TO WHICH QUITE A FEW WERE ADDED BY THE LD. CIT-DR DURING ARGUMENTS, OF COURSE, ON THE BASIS OF THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY IS AT LIBE RTY TO AT ANY TIME SWITCH FROM ONE PROVISION TO ANOTHER, UNLESS, OF COURSE, PROSCRIBED BY LAW, WHICH WE FIND AS ABSENT. THAT THE SOCIETY IS NOT PURSUING ANY OTHER ACTIVITY IS APPARENT FROM ITS FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, SUMMARIZED AT PARA 6 OF THE IMPUGNED OR DER, AS UNDER: ITA NO. 422 (ASR)/2017(AY 2017-18) SWAMI VIVEKANA ND EDUCATIONAL V. CIT(E) 6 F.Y. GROSS RECEIPT NET SURPLUS FIXED ASSETS CASH & BANK SWAMI VIVEKANAND EDUCATIONAL & WELFARE SOCIET Y (CON SOLIDATED WITH THE SCHOOL) 2013-14 2014 - 15 RS. 61,49,533/- RS. 52,54,142/ - RS. 4,42,243/- RS. 1,07,621/ - RS. 1,06,64,618/- RS. 92,37,820/ - RS. 3,17,634/- RS. 6,87, 380/ - 2014-15 RS. 52,54,142/- RS. 1,07,621/- RS. 92,57,820/- RS. 6,87,380/- 2015-16 RS. 87,54,528/- RS.18,89,331/- RS. 1,21,32,430/- RS. 3,01,057/- F.Y. GROSS RECEIPT NET SURPLUS FIXED ASSETS CASH & BANK THE LORDS SCHOOL, VILLAGE RAMNAGAR 2013 - 14 RS. 46,81,533/ - RS. 4,24,749 / - RS. 3 6,73,929/ - RS. 2,69,833/ - 2014 - 15 RS. 52,54,14 2/ - RS. 12,97,093/ - RS. 29,66,200 / - RS. 6,67, 279 / - 2015-16 RS. 87,54.528/- RS, 29,04,932/- RS. 64,69,972/- RS. 2,54,412/- APART FROM A MINOR GAIN FOR F.Y. 2013-14 (BEING THE EXCESS OF DONATION RECEIVED - AT RS.14.68 LACS, OVER THE SOCIETY EXPENSES), THE C ONSOLIDATED SURPLUS IS LOWER THAN THAT OF THE SCHOOL. THE LD. CIT(E) HAS CLEARLY FAIL ED TO OBSERVE THIS APPARENT FACT. THE DONATION AFORESAID ALSO EXPLAINS THE INCREASE I N THE GROSS RECEIPT OF THE SOCIETY OVER THAT OF THE SCHOOL FOR F.Y. 2013-14. THE ASSES SEE IS BOOKING EXPENDITURE ON LEASE RENT; DEPRECIATION (ON SCHOOL BUILDING); INTE REST ON TERM LOAN (FOR THE BUILDING AND BUSES); ACCOUNTANCY CHARGES, ETC., ONLY IN THE SOCIETYS ACCOUNTS. THE SAME IS A PART OF THE SCHOOL EXPENDITURE EVEN AS ARGUED BY THE LD. COUNSEL, AND WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON FOR THE ACCOUNTING PATTERN ADOPTED. THE ADDITION TO THE SCHOOL BUILDING FOR EACH YEAR EXCEEDS THE TERM LOAN AVAILE D AND THE DEVELOPMENT FUND, SO THAT A PART OF THE SURPLUS ALSO GETS INVESTED THERE IN. THE ONLY OTHER INCOME IS BY WAY OF INTEREST AT RS.5,333/-, FOR F.Y. 2015-16. IT IS RATHER PRUDENT TO INVEST THE SURPLUS FUNDS IN LIQUID DEPOSIT, FETCHING SOME INCO ME, EVEN AS IT MAY WELL REPAY (OR PREPAY) THE TERM LOANS, EARNING BETTER RETURN O N ITS CAPITAL. SCHOOL FEES WHICH IS TO BE SEEN IN TOTAL, WE AGREE, HAS TO BE REASONA BLE. THE REASON IS SIMPLE. CHARGE OF HEFTY FEES UNDERMINES AND VIOLATES THE VERY BASI S OR NOTION OF CHARITY, EXCLUDING THOSE PLACED AT THE LOWER END OF THE SOCIETAL STRAT A. THAT APART, THE ASSESSEE, BY ITS CONSTITUTION, IS A NON-PROFIT SOCIETY. THE REASONAB LENESS AFORE-STATED, HOWEVER, IS TO BE CONSIDERED WITH REFERENCE TO THE COST OF PROVIDI NG EDUCATION, QUALITY OF WHICH IS ITA NO. 422 (ASR)/2017(AY 2017-18) SWAMI VIVEKANA ND EDUCATIONAL V. CIT(E) 7 TO BE MAINTAINED. THE SCHOOL IS AFFILIATED TO THE P UNJAB BOARD, RUNNING ON CBSE PATTERN. THERE IS NOTHING TO SUGGEST OF THE COSTS B EING INFLATED, AS WE NOT UN- OFTEN, SEE, WITH A VIEW TO DISCLOSE A REASONABLE PR OFIT! A SURPLUS, BY ITSELF, WHICH IN FACT IS ESSENTIAL, WOULD NOT RENDER THE SOCIETY AS NOT A NON-PROFIT SOCIETY, EVEN AS, GIVEN ITS MANDATE AS A NON-PROFIT BODY, IT MAY WELL BE CONTAINED, IF NOT RESTRICTED FURTHER, FROM THE LEVEL OF 20% TO 25% (OF THE GROSS RECEIPT) WHICH OBTAINS FOR F.YS. 2014-15 & 2015-16, BEING ONLY THE SECOND AND THIRD YEARS OF ITS OPERATION. THIS IS AS THE TOTAL FEES (COST TO THE STUDENTS) COULD BE R EDUCED BY AS MUCH, WHILE STILL MEETING THE COST, WHICH WOULD ONLY STABILIZE IN FUT URE. ALL THE RECEIPTS AND EXPENSES BEING ACCOUNTED, WITH THE ACCOUNTS BEING A UDITED, WE FIND NO BASIS FOR DRAWING ANY ADVERSE INFERENCE FROM THE DEPOSIT OF C ASH IN BANK POST 08.11.2016. THE FACTS ARE REQUIRED TO BE SEEN IN PERSPECTIVE, W HICH WE FIND HAS NOT BEEN BY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY. 5. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ONLY CONSIDER IT PRO PER THAT THE MATTER IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(E). WE HAVE ALREADY NOT ED TWO ASPECTS ON WHICH WE FIND THE ASSESSEE TO HAVE NOT FURNISHED A SATISFACTORY E XPLANATION, AND WHICH IMPINGE DIRECTLY ON THE ACCEPTANCE OR OTHERWISE - BEING GER MANE TO THE PARAMETERS LAID DOWN FOR THE PURPOSE, OF THE ASSESSEES APPLICATION U/S. 12A. THE ASSESSEE, AS ASSURED BY THE LD. AR BEFORE US, SHALL CLARIFY ON T HOSE ASPECTS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(E), WITH A VIEW TO SATISFY HIM THEREON. IT NEED S TO BE APPRECIATED THAT IT IS, UNDER LAW, THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY WHICH IS TO BE S ATISFIED ABOUT THE OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY AS WELL AS THE GENUINENESS OF ITS ACTIVITI ES. FURTHER, WE ARE CONSCIOUS THAT THE LD. CIT(E) HAS NOT COMMENTED ADVERSELY ON EITHE R OF THESE ASPECTS. HOWEVER, NEITHER AS HE EXPRESSED SATISFACTION WITH REGARD TH ERETO, SO THAT THE SAME STAND APPARENTLY OVERLOOKED BY HIM, EVEN AS HAVE BEEN FOU ND EXTREMELY RELEVANT BY US. TAX PROCEEDINGS, IT MAY BE NOTED, ARE NOT ADVERSARI AL PROCEEDINGS, AS CLARIFIED BY ITA NO. 422 (ASR)/2017(AY 2017-18) SWAMI VIVEKANA ND EDUCATIONAL V. CIT(E) 8 THE HIGHER COURTS TIME AND AGAIN; THE PURVIEW OF AN APPELLATE AUTHORITY BEING THE CORRECT DETERMINATION OF THE ASSESSEES TAX LIABILI TY, AND WHICH WOULD INCLUDE THE PROCEDURAL ASPECTS AS WELL. WE HAVE, IN DECIDING TH IS APPEAL, FOLLOWED THE DICTUM BY THE APEX COURT LAID DOWN IN CIT V. WALCHAND & CO. (P.) LTD. [1967] 65 ITR 381 (SC), I.E., THE TRIBUNAL IS TO DEAL WITH AND DE TERMINE ALL THE QUESTIONS WHICH ARISE OUT OF THE SUBJECT MATTER OF APPEAL, IN LIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE, AND CONSISTENTLY WITH THE JUSTICE OF THE CASE. WE DECIDE ACCORDINGLY . 6. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON APRIL 20, 201 8 SD/- SD/- (N. K. CHOUDHRY) (SANJAY ARORA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE: 20.04.2018 /GP/SR. PS. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE APPELLANT: SWAMI VIVEKANAND EDUCATIONAL & WELFARE SOCIETY, VILL. RAMNAGAR CHANNA, KATRON MANAL ROAD, TEHSIL SHERPUR (2) THE RESPONDENT: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH (3) THE CIT (E), CHANDIGARH (4) THE CIT CONCERNED (5) THE SR. DR, I.T.A.T TRUE COPY BY ORDER