ACIT, CC, Agra V. Gayatri Shiksha Samiti, Agra

ITA 43/AGR/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 4320314 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-10-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 11-10-2011
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 10-02-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: VITHAL DAS

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 43/AGRA/2011 ASSTT. YEAR : 2005-06 D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE, VS. GAYITRI SHIKSHA SA MITI, AGRA. GHATIA AZAM KHAN, AGRA. (PAN : AAAAG 1565 D) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR APPELLANT : SHRI WASEEM ARSHAD, SR. D.R. FOR RESPONDENT : SHRI VITHAL DAS, ADVOCATE. DATE OF HEARING : 11.10.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11.10.2011 ORDER PER BENCH : THE DEPARTMENT HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL AGAIN ST THE ORDER DATED 20.10.2010 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A)-II, AGRA. THE EFFECTIVE GROUN DS RAISED BY THE REVENUE READ AS UNDER : 1. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW IN ALLOWING THE EXEMPTION U/S. 10(23C)(IIIAD) WITHOUT PROPERLY APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE ASS ESSEE HAS NOWHERE DISCHARGED HIS ONUS REGARDING THE GENUINENESS OF TH E SOCIETYS AS PER THE CONDITION LAID DOWN IN SECTION 10(23C)(IIIAD). 2. IN DOING SO CIT(A) HAS PUT HIS OWN SATISFACTION IN PLACE OF AOS SATISFACTION THAT THE DETAILS OF MANY SEIZED DOCUME NTS WERE NOT ENTERED IN THE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT MAINTAINED BY THE ASSE SSEE WHICH COULD JUSTIFY THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE SOLELY AND E XCLUSIVELY FOR THE EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. 3. CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.6,40 ,679/- ON A WRONG CONCLUSION THAT THE DIFFERENCE OF INVESTMENT IN CON STRUCTION WAS ONLY 10.6% AND WHICH WAS IN THE TOLERABLE MARGIN OF THE JUDICIALLY ACCEPTABLE NORM. IN DOING SO, THE CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE UNDISCLOSED ITA NO. 43/AGRA/2011 2 INVESTMENT, ONCE DETERMINED, MUST BE CONSIDERED FOR THE COMPUTATION OF TAX & INTEREST. 4. CIT(A) ERRED DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.2 LAC O N A WRONG APPRECIATION OF FACTS & LAW BY SUBSTITUTING HIS OWN SATISFACTION IN PLACE OF AOS SATISFACTION THAT THE ONUS OF THESE UNEXPLAINED EXP ENSES WERE NOT DISCHARGED BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE SATISFACTION OF A O. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FILED A PAPER BOOK CONTAINING PAGES 1 TO 49, IN WHICH HE HAS ATTACHED COPY OF WRI TTEN SUBMISSIONS DATED 23.07.2009 FILED BEFORE THE CIT(A), COPY OF STATEMENT OF FACTS & GRO UNDS OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE CIT(A), COPY OF CIT(A) ORDER DATED 09.09.09 FOR A.Y. 2003-04 AND COPY OF CIT(A) ORDER DATED 09.09.09 FOR A.Y. 2004-05. HE STATED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALR EADY DECIDED THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE PREVIOUS ASSESSMENT YEARS, I.E ., 2003-04 AND 2004-05 VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 09.09.2009 AND THE DEPARTMENT HAS ACCEPTED THE SAME BECAUSE THE DEPARTMENT HAS NOT FILED ANY APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. HE REQUESTED THAT WHEN THE DEPARTMENT HAS ACCEPTED THE ORDER OF CIT(A) ON THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE, THEREFORE, THE PRES ENT APPEAL FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT ON THE SAME ISSUE MAY BE DISMISSED. 3. ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDE R PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND HAS NOT CONTROVERTED THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE WITH ANY PROOF. 4. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSING THE RELEVANT RECORD AVAILABLE WITH US, ESPECIALLY THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE CIT(A) FOR PREV IOUS ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04 AND 2004-05 DATED 09.09.2009, AGAINST WHICH THE DEPARTMENT HAS NOT FILED ANY APPEAL, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT WHEN THE DEPARTMENT HAS ACC EPTED THE ORDER OF LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY DATED 09.09.2009 PASSED FOR PREVIOUS ASSE SSMENT YEARS AND THE LD. DR HAS ALSO NOT FILED ITA NO. 43/AGRA/2011 3 ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE CONTROVERTING THE ARGUMENT S OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, TO MAINTAIN THE CONSISTENCY, NO INTERFERENCE IS CALLED FOR IN THE WELL REASONED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. THEREFORE, WE UPHOLD THE IMPUGNED ORDER BY DISMISSING THE APPEAL FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11.10.2011. SD/- SD/- (B.C. MEENA) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 11 TH OCTOBER, 2011 *AKS/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) BY ORDER 4. CIT, CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR TRUE COPY ITA NO. 43/AGRA/2011 4 DOD : 11.10.2011 DOT : 11.10.2011 DOR : 11.10.2011 B.C. : 12.10.2011