DCIT, Jaipur V. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SOCIETY(GITS), Jaipur

ITA 43/JPR/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1899 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 11-01-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VARINDER MEHTA; R A VERMA CIT LQUOK
• Assessee Lawyers: S L PODDAR
• Keywords: Depreciation; Search and seizure; Charitable institution; Question of law; Capital receipt; Benefit of exemption
• Section: 143(3); 12A; 12AA; 132; 12; 11

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH HKKXPAN] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH DQY HKKJR] U;KF;D LNL ; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM & SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 43/JP/2017 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SOCIETY (GITS), D-91, AMBABARI, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AAATG 3217 H VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 647/JP/2017 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SOCIETY (GITS), D-91, AMBABARI, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AAATG 3217 H VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.L. PODDAR (ADV) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI VARINDER MEHTA (CIT) & SHRI R.A. VERMA (ADDL.CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 11/10/2017 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30/10/2017 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: BHAGCHAND, A.M. THESE ARE THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE EMANATE S FROM THE SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A)-4, JAIPUR DATED 30/11/2016 FOR THE A.Y. 2013-14 & ORDER DATED 26/05/2017 FOR THE A.Y. 2014-15 RESPECTI VELY. 2 ITA 43 & 647/JP/2017 ACIT VS. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY 2. BOTH THE APPEALS ARE BEING HEARD TOGETHER AND FO R THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE AND BREVITY, COMMON ORDER IS BEING PASS ED. 3. FIRSTLY WE TAKE REVENUES APPEAL BEING ITA NO. 43 /JP/2017 IN THIS APPEAL, THE REVENUE HAS TAKEN FOLLOWING GRO UNDS OF APPEAL: 1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE ID. CIT(A) WAS RIGHT IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS . 1,11,49,815/- MADE BY A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF INCOME OVER EXPENDITURE. 2. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE ID. CIT(A) WAS RIGHT IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS . 1,19,08,317/- MADE BY A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF TREATMENT OF CAPITAL REC EIPTS AS REVENUE RECEIPTS. 3. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE ID. CIT(A) WAS RIGHT IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS . 75,101/- MADE BY A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF DELAYED PAYMENT TOWARDS EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION OF ESI WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT IT WAS AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 36(L)(VA) OF THE ACT, 1961. 4. IN THE GROUNDS NO. 1 AND 2 OF THE APPEAL, THE IS SUE INVOLVED ARE DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,11,49,815/- MADE BY THE ASSESS ING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF INCOME OVER EXPENDITURE AND DELETING THE ADDITION O F RS. 1,19,08,317/- ON ACCOUNT OF TREATMENT OF CAPITAL RECEIPTS AS REVENUE RECEIPTS. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE ADDITIONS BY HOLDING AS UNDER: I HAVE DULY CONSIDERED ASSESSEE'S SUBMISSION AND C AREFULLY GONE THROUGH ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE AO. I HAVE ALSO CARE FULLY GONE THROUGH THE HONBLE ITAT BENCH JAIPURS ORDER DATED 15/3/2012 I N ITA NO 1062/JP/2011 FOR AY 2008-09 WHICH HAS BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF REVENUE AND THE 3 ITA 43 & 647/JP/2017 ACIT VS. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSEE HAS ALSO NOT CHALLENGE THE SAID ORDER. AO RELYING ON THE DECISION OF HONBLE ITAT JAIPUR (SUPRA) HAS OBSERVED IN THE ASS ESSMENT ORDER THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C) OF THE ACT. FOR THE SAKE OF CLARITY, RELEVANT EXTRACTS OF WHICH IS REPRODUCED H ERE AS UNDER: '6. THE ID. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT IN EARLIER YEAR THE ASSESSEE'S TOTAL INCOME WAS OF LOSS AND, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CLAIMED ANY EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 NEITHER IT WAS ALLOWED. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE APPLIED FOR EXE MPTION OF ITS INCOME UNDER SECTION 10(23C)(VI) OF THE ACT. THE ID . CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 22. 3.2006 HAD REJECTED THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND THIS F ACT HAS BEEN MENTIONED IN THE ORDER PASSED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YE AR 2004-05, COPY OF WHICH IS PLACED AT PAPER BOOK PAGES 66-70. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT IN EARLIER YEAR'S ASSESSMENT HAS BEE N COMPLETED AND DEPARTMENT ITSELF HAS ALLOWED THE LOSS TO BE CA RRY FORWARD. ATTENTION OF THE BENCH WAS DRAWN ON VARIOUS ASSESSM ENT ORDERS PLACED IN THE PAPER BOOK.' 7. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE ID. D/R STATED THAT THE ISSU E MAY BE DECIDED ON MERIT. 8. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSING THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE DESERVES TO SUCCEED I N THIS GROUND. WE HAVE SEEM VARIOUS ASSESSMENT ORDERS FOR EARLIER YEARS, COPIES OF WHICH ARE PLACED ON RECORD AND FOUND THAT THE RE SPECTIVE ASSESSING OFFICERS HAD ALLOWED THE NET DEFICIT TO B E CARRIED FORWARD IN THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THEREFORE, THER E IS NO REASON IN NOT ALLOWING THE BENEFIT OF CARRY FORWARD LOSSES/DE FICIT. ACCORDINGLY, WE DIRECT THE AO TO ALLOW THE BENEFIT OF QUANTIFIED CARRY FORWARD LOSSES TO THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE IN COME OF THE ASSESSEE. 9. FOR THE SAKE OF CLARIFICATION, FOR THE YEAR CON SIDERATION THERE WAS A POSITIVE INCOME AND, THEREFORE, ASSESSEE HAS FILED ITS RETURN SHOWING THE INCOME OF THE YEAR, EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT HAS ALSO BEEN CLAIMED. IT CARRY FORWARD LOSSES ARE ALLO WED TO BE SET OFF THEM THE INCOME WILL BECOME OF NEGATIVE FIGURE AND, THEREFORE, 4 ITA 43 & 647/JP/2017 ACIT VS. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY EXEMPTION U/S 11 CANNOT BE ALLOWED. THE LD. COUNCIL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS FAIRLY AGREED THAT IF GR NO. 8 IS ALLO WED IN ITS FAVOUR THEN OTHER GROUNDS WILL BECOME ACADEMIC IN NATURE. SINCE WE HAVE ALLOWED THIS GROUND IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE, THEREFOR E, ALL OTHER GROUNDS HAVE BECOME ACADEMIC IN NATURE AND HAS BECO ME INFRUCTUOUS, THEY ARE DISMISSED.'(STRESS SUPPLIED B Y ME) BEFORE PROCEEDING FURTHER, I WOULD LIKE TO PUT ALL RELEVANT FACTS OF THE CASE AS UNDER: (I) ASSESSEE BELONGS TO KANDOI GR' ON WHOSE PREMI SES, A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION U/S 132 OF THE ACT WAS CARRIED OU T ON 18.07.2012. (II) ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT ITS ORIGINAL E-RE TURN OF INCOME FOR AY 2013-14 WAS FILED ON 30.09.2013 DECLARING TOTAL INC OME AT NIL, RELEVANT EXTRACTS OF WHICH ARE REPRODUCED HERE AS UNDER: COMPUTATION OF TOTAL INCOME. INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES 27,72,06,237 COLLEGE FEES 19,79,22,400 HOSTEL FEES 6,96,40,750 OTHER INCOME 96,43,087 DEPRECIATION ITEM 5,29,57,059 ----------------------------------- 33,01,63,296 LESS: DEPRECIATION AS PER CHART 57(II) 5,29,57,059 5,29,57,059 ------------------------------------------- 27,72,06,237 INCOME BEFORE APPLICATION OF INCOME 27,72,06,2 37 LESS: APPLICATION OF INCOME TOTAL EXPENDITURE INC. DEPRECIATION 26,60,56,422 PURCHASE OF FIXED ASSETS 11,83,61,435 38,44,17,857 APPLICATION OF INCOME CANNOT MORE THAN RS. 27,72,06 ,237 ---------- 27,72,06,237 GROSS TOTAL INCOME 0 TOTAL INCOME 0 (III) ASSESSEE, BEING A SOCIETY, IS REGISTERED U/S 12AA OF THE ACT, ACCORDINGLY ITS INCOME IS EXEMPT U/S 10(23C) OF THE ACT AND CIT (EXEMPTION) JAIPUR 5 ITA 43 & 647/JP/2017 ACIT VS. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY VIDE ORDER DT 22/05/2000 HAS ISSUED CERTIFICATE EFF ECTIVE FROM 11.05.2010 IN THIS REGARD. THE APPELLANT SOCIETY AP PLIES ITS INCOME AND FUNDS ACCRUED FROM INSTITUTES NAMELY GLOBAL INSTITU TE OF TECHNOLOGY & GLOBAL COLLAGE OF TECHNOLOGY FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSE S AS DEFINED U/S 2(15) OF THE ACT. (IV) EVEN IF EXEMPTION IS DENIED U/S 10(23C) OF THE ACT, ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED FOR EXEMPTION U/S 11 & 12 ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED EXEM PTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT NOT U/S 10(23C) OF THE ACT AS CONTENDED BY THE AO IN PG 4 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. ON CAREFUL PERUSAL OF STATUTE , IT IS SEEN THAT EXEMPTION U/S 11 & 12 OF THE ACT IS ALLOWABLE IF TH E ASSESSEE IS REGISTERED U/S 12AA OF THE ACT AND INVOLVED IN CHAR ITABLE ACTIVITIES AS PRESCRIBED IN SEC 2(15) OF THE ACT. FURTHER, EXEMPT ION U/S 11 & 12 OF THE ACT IS NOT ALLOWED IF THERE IS VIOLATION OF SEC 13(1) OF THE ACT ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE. MORE SPECIFICALLY, AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SEC 13(1)(D) OF THE ACT, EXEMPTION IS NOT ALLOWED IF FU NDS MEANT FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSE ARE INVESTED FOR THE PERIOD DURI NG THE YEAR IN ANY FORM OTHERWISE PRESCRIBED U/S 11(5) OF THE ACT. (V) VARIOUS COURTS INCLUDING HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL ITAT IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE FOR AY 2008-09 (SUPRA) HAS ALLOWED THE BENEFIT OF QUANTIFIED CARRY FORWARD LOSSES TO THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE INCOME O F THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER, IF THERE IS A POSITIVE INCOME OF THE ASSES SEE FOR THE YEAR, EXEMPTION U/S 11 IS ALLOWABLE SUBJECT TO CONDITIONA LTIES PRESCRIBED U/S 13(1) OF THE ACT BUT IF THE CARRY FORWARD LOSSES AR E ALLOWED TO BE SET OFF THEN THE INCOME WILL BECOME OF NEGATIVE FIGURE AND THEREFORE, EXEMPTION UNDER SEC 11 OF THE ACT CANNOT BE ALLOWED . (VI) ON PERUSAL OF AUDIT REPORT SUBMITTED U/S 12A(B ) OF THE ACT, IT IS SEEN THAT AN AMOUNT OF INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR APPLI ED TO CHARITABLE 6 ITA 43 & 647/JP/2017 ACIT VS. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY PURPOSE DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO AY 201 3-14 IS AT RS. 1,11,49,814.80 WHEREAS ADDITION TO FIXED ASSETS IS AT RS. 1,18,63,61,435.43. HOWEVER, AO IN THE ASSESSMENT OR DER ON PG 3 HAS MENTIONED THAT THE ISSUE RELATING TO SEC. 10(23C) O F THE ACT HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE HON'BLE ITAT BENCH JAIPUR IN FAVOUR OF REVENUE BY ITA NO. 1062/JP/2011 DT 15.03.2012 FOR AY 2008-09 AND T HE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CHALLENGED THE SAID ORDER, ACCORDINGLY, ASSESSE E IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C) OF THE ACT. AO IN THE ASSESSM ENT ORDER FURTHER ADDS THAT THE APPELLANT HAS SHOWN GROSS RECEIPTS OF RS. 27,72,06,237/= ON WHICH CLAIMED EXPENSES TO THE TUNE OF RS. 26,60, 56,422/= WHICH TANTAMOUNT TO INCOME OVER EXPENDITURE OF RS. 1,11,4 9,815/=. IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED FOR THE YEAR, AO HAS MADE F OLLOWING ADDITIONS / DISALLOWANCES: A) INCOME OVER EXPENDITURE [BEING EXEMPTION DENIED U/ S 10(23C)] RS. 1,11,49,815/= (B) TRANSFER TO GENERAL RESERVE RS. 1,19,08,31 7/= * REGISTRATION RECEIPTS RS.20,31,150/= * BOOK BANK INCOME RS. 3,90,400/= * FORMS/LATE FEES RS.94,86,767/= LD AR OF THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITS THAT UNDER NO PROVISIONS OF ACT RECEIPT OF CAPITAL NATURE CAN BE TAXED AS INCOME AS THE SAID RECEIPTS ARE OF THE NATURE OF CAPITAL RECEIPTS WITH OVERRIDI NG TITLE. ALL THE ABOVE MENTIONED RECEIPTS WERE NONRECURRING IN NATURE AND WERE OF CAPITAL NATURE HENCE THE SAME DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE PRO FIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT; THUS, WERE ADDED TO THE GENERAL RESERVES. ASSESSEE HAS RELIED UPON FOLLOWING JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS: * HAKIM ABDUL HAMID 90ITR 203(FB) * BOMBAY OILSEEDS AND OIL EXCHANGE LTD. 202 ITR 198 (BOM) * HINDUSTAN HOUSING & LAND DEVELOPMENT TRUST LTD 161 ITR 524 (SC) (VII) ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT AO WHILE MAKING A FOREMENTIONED ADDITIONS HAS NOT REFERRED TO ANY INCRIMINATING DOC UMENTS/ MATERIALS 7 ITA 43 & 647/JP/2017 ACIT VS. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY FOUND FROM THE SEARCHED PREMISES. FURTHER, ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT AO HAS ACCEPTED THE STATUTORY AUDIT REPORT U/S 12(1)A(B) OF THE ACT AND ALSO NOT POINTED OUT ANY MISTAKE/DISCREPANC Y. IN THIS REGARD, ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITS THAT IN VIEW OF JUDGMENTS GIVEN BY VARIOUS COURTS INCLUDING HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL ITAT AND HI GH COURTS, ASSESSMENT COMPLETED BY MAKING AFOREMENTIONED ADDIT IONS U/S 143(3) R.W.S 153B(1)(B) OF THE ACT IN ABSENCE OF INCRIMINA TING MATERIALS CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. IN VIEW OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS DISCUSSED ABOVE AND DULY CONSIDERING THE CASE LAWS RELIED UPON BY THE A SSESSEE AND REMAND REPORT AND REJOINDER FILED, I AM OF THE CONSIDERATE VIEW THAT AS THERE IS NO VIOLATION OF SEC 13(1) OF THE ACT, EXEMPTION U/S 11 & 12 OF THE ACT IS ALLOWABLE TO THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS ALSO REGISTERED U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. FURTHER, HERE IN THIS CASE INCOME BEFORE APPLICATIO N OF INCOME IS RS. 27,72,06,237/= AGAINST WHICH ASSESSEE HAS INCURRED EXPENDITURE OF RS. 38,44,17,857/= WHICH CAN TAKE CARE OF FURTHER ADDIT ION MADE OF RS. 1,19,08,317/=. EVEN IF, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF HONBL E ITAT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE (SUPRA), QUANTIFIED CARRIED FORWARD LOSSES BE ALLOWED TO BE SET OFF WITH THE INCOME OF THE ASSESS EE, THEN NET RESULT WILL BE NEGATIVE IN THAT CASE. CONSIDERING ALL THES E FACTS, ADDITIONS MADE OF RS. 1.11,49,815/= & RS. 1, 19,08,317/= ARE HEREBY DELETED. ASSESSEES APPEAL IN GR NO 2 & 3 ARE ALLOWED. 5. NOW THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT. TH E LD. CIT DR HAS RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ON THE CONTR ARY, THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 8 ITA 43 & 647/JP/2017 ACIT VS. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY 6. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES ON THIS ISSUE. THER E WAS NO VIOLATION OF SECTION 13(1) OF THE ACT. EXEMPTIONS U/S 11 & 12 OF THE ACT IS ALLOWABLE. THE INCOME BEFORE APPLICATION OF INCOME WAS OF RS. 27,7 2,06,237/- WHILE THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED WAS OF RS. 38,44,17,857/-, THE ITAT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE (SUPRA) HAS QUANTIFIED CARRIED FORWARD LOSSES, WHICH ARE TO BE ALLOWED TO BE SET OFF WITH THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE, HENCE T HE NET RESULT COMES TO NEGATIVE. CONSIDERING ALL THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTA NCES, WE SUSTAIN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY, GROUNDS NO. 1 AND 2 OF THE REVENUES APPEAL STAND DISMISSED. 7. THE GROUND NO. 3 OF THE REVENUES APPEAL IS WITH REGARD TO DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 75,101/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER ON ACCOUNT OF DELAYED PAYMENT TOWARDS EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION OF ESI. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE ADDITION BY HOLDING AS UNDER: 3.4.2 I HAVE DULY CONSIDERED ASSESSEE'S SUBMISSION AND CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE AO. I HAVE ALSO TAKE N A NOTE OF FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE AS WELL AS CASE LAWS RELIED UPON . THE ISSUE OF DELAYED PAYMENT OF PF/ESI HAS ALREADY BEEN SETTLED BY THE H ONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT BY FOLLOWING THE PRINCIPLES LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE APEX COURT IN VINAY CEMENT CASE(SUPRA) HAS DECIDED THE MATTERS IN CASE OF CIT VS. SBBJ [2014] 265 CTR 411 AND CIT VS. UDAIPUR DUG DH UTPADAK SANGH LTD [2014] 265 CTR 59 AND HELD THAT WHERE PF/ESI PAID AFTER DUE DATE UNDER RESPECTIVE ACT BUT BEFORE FILING OF RETURN U/ S 139(1) CANNOT BE DISALLOWED U/S 36(1 )(VA) R.W.S. 2(24) (X)OF THE AC T. 9 ITA 43 & 647/JP/2017 ACIT VS. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY IN VIEW OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFOREMENTIONED JUDICIAL DECISIONS, AD DITION OF RS. 75,101/- MADE AS INCOME OF APPELLANT ON ACCOUNT OF DELAYED PAYMENT OF EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION OF PF AND ESIC IS HEREBY DELETED. ASSESSEES APPEAL IN GR NO. 4 STANDS ALLOWED. 8. NOW THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT. TH E LD CIT DR HAS RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND SUBMITTED THAT IT WAS THE VIOLATION OF SECTION 36(1) (VA) OF THE ACT. ON THE OTHER HAND, T HE LD AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 9. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES ON THIS ISSUE. THIS ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF THE HONB LE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SBBJ (2014) 265 CTR 411. THE REFORE, ON THIS ISSUE ALSO, ME UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY, THIS GROUND OF REVENUES APPEAL STAND DISMISSED. 10. ITA NO. 647/JP/2017 IN THIS APPEAL, THE REVENUE HAS TAKEN FOLLOWING GRO UNDS OF APPEAL: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IS PERVERSE AS THE ISSUE OF CARRIED FORWARD AND SET OFF OF LOSSES AND BENEFIT OF EXEMPTION U/S 11 & 12 CANN OT GO TOGETHER. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE ID. CIT(A) MISINTERPRETED THE ORDER OF HONBLE ITAT FOR A.Y. 2013-14 WHEREBY ISSUE OF CARRIED FORWARD OF LOSSES WAS DECI DED AND CLAIM OF BENEFIT U/S 11 WAS NOT PRESSED. 10 ITA 43 & 647/JP/2017 ACIT VS. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE ORDER OF THE ID. CIT(A) SUFFERS OF PERVERSITY BECAU SE HE HAS CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE REGARDING EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C) OF THE ACT WHICH WAS NOT THE ISSUE BEFORE T HE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING THE BENEFIT OF EXEMPTION OF SECTION 11 OF THE ACT DISALLOWED BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF CLEAR CU T VIOLATION OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(1)(C) R.W.S. 13(2) AND 13( 3) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 . 5. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 5,22, 21,300/- MADE BY A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF DEVELOPMENT FEES TREATING AS REV ENUE RECEIPT. 6. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 23,16 ,700/- MADE BY A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF TREATMENT OF CAPITAL RECEIPTS AS REVENUE RECEIPTS. 7. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,28, 688/- MADE BY A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF DELAYED PAYMENT TOWARDS EMPLOYEES CO NTRIBUTION OF ESI. 8. ANY OTHER QUESTION OF LAW AS DEEMED FIT IN THE F ACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE MAY ALSO BE FRAMED BEFORE THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. 11. THE ISSUE RAISED FROM GROUNDS NO. 1 TO 6 HAVE B EEN DECIDED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN HIS ORDER AT PARA 3.3.3, WHICH IS REPRODU CED HEREUNDER: 3.3.3 I HAVE DULY CONSIDERED ASSESSEE'S SUBMISSION AND CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE AO. I HAVE ALSO CARE FULLY GONE THROUGH THE HONBLE ITAT BENCH JAIPURS ORDER DATED 15/3/20 12 IN ITA NO 1062/JP/2011 FOR AY 2008-09 WHICH HAS BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF REVENUE AND THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO NOT CHALLENGE THE SAID ORDER. AO 11 ITA 43 & 647/JP/2017 ACIT VS. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY RELYING ON THE DECISION OF HONBLE ITAT JAIPUR (SUP RA) HAS OBSERVED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C) OF THE ACT. FOR THE SAKE OF CLARITY, RELEVANT EXTRA CTS OF WHICH IS REPRODUCED HERE AS UNDER: '6. THE ID. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT IN EARLIER YEAR THE ASSESSEE'S TOTAL INCOME WAS OF LOSS AND, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CLAIMED ANY EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 NEITHER IT WAS ALLOWED. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE APPLIED FOR EXE MPTION OF ITS INCOME UNDER SECTION 10(23C)(VI) OF THE ACT. THE ID . CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 22. 3.2006 HAD REJECTED THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND THIS F ACT HAS BEEN MENTIONED IN THE ORDER PASSED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YE AR 2004-05, COPY OF WHICH IS PLACED AT PAPER BOOK PAGES 66-70. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT IN EARLIER YEAR'S ASSESSMENT HAS BEE N COMPLETED AND DEPARTMENT ITSELF HAS ALLOWED THE LOSS TO BE CA RRY FORWARD. ATTENTION OF THE BENCH WAS DRAWN ON VARIOUS ASSESSM ENT ORDERS PLACED IN THE PAPER BOOK.' 7. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE ID. D/R STATED THAT THE ISSU E MAY BE DECIDED ON MERIT. 8. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSING THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE DESERVES TO SUCCEED I N THIS GROUND. WE HAVE SEEM VARIOUS ASSESSMENT ORDERS FOR EARLIER YEARS, COPIES OF WHICH ARE PLACED ON RECORD AND FOUND THAT THE RE SPECTIVE ASSESSING OFFICERS HAD ALLOWED THE NET DEFICIT TO B E CARRIED FORWARD IN THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THEREFORE, THER E IS NO REASON IN NOT ALLOWING THE BENEFIT OF CARRY FORWARD LOSSES/DE FICIT. ACCORDINGLY, WE DIRECT THE AO TO ALLOW THE BENEFIT OF QUANTIFIED CARRY FORWARD LOSSES TO THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE IN COME OF THE ASSESSEE. 9. FOR THE SAKE OF CLARIFICATION, FOR THE YEAR CON SIDERATION THERE WAS A POSITIVE INCOME AND, THEREFORE, ASSESSEE HAS FILED ITS RETURN SHOWING THE INCOME OF THE YEAR, EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT HAS ALSO BEEN CLAIMED. IT CARRY FORWARD LOSSES ARE ALLO WED TO BE SET OFF THEM THE INCOME WILL BECOME OF NEGATIVE FIGURE AND, THEREFORE, EXEMPTION U/S 11 CANNOT BE ALLOWED. THE LD. COUNCIL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS FAIRLY AGREED THAT IF GR NO. 8 IS ALLO WED IN ITS FAVOUR 12 ITA 43 & 647/JP/2017 ACIT VS. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY THEN OTHER GROUNDS WILL BECOME ACADEMIC IN NATURE. SINCE WE HAVE ALLOWED THIS GROUND IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE, THEREFOR E, ALL OTHER GROUNDS HAVE BECOME ACADEMIC IN NATURE AND HAS BECO ME INFRUCTUOUS, THEY ARE DISMISSED.'(STRESS SUPPLIED B Y ME) BEFORE PROCEEDING FURTHER, I WOULD LIKE TO PUT ALL RELEVANT FACTS OF THE CASE AS UNDER: (I) ASSESSEE BELONGS TO KANDOI GR' ON WHOSE PREMI SES, A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION U/S 132 OF THE ACT WAS CARRIED OU T ON 18.07.2012. (II) ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT ITS ORIGINAL E-RE TURN OF INCOME FOR AY 2014-15 WAS FILED ON 17.11.2014 DECLARING TOTAL INC OME AT NIL, RELEVANT EXTRACTS OF WHICH ARE REPRODUCED HERE AS UNDER: COMPUTATION OF TOTAL INCOME. INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES 35,84,55,229 COLLEGE FEES 26,27,47,913 HOSTEL FEES 8,43,59,275 OTHER INCOME 1,13,48,041 DEPRECIATION ITEM 5,29,87,717 ----------------------------------- 41,14,42,964 LESS: DEPRECIATION AS PER CHART 57(II) 5,29,87,717 5,29,87,717 ------------------------------------------- 35,84,55,229 INCOME BEFORE APPLICATION OF INCOME 35,84,55,2 29 LESS: APPLICATION OF INCOME TOTAL EXPENDITURE INC. DEPRECIATION 32,44,26,398 PURCHASE OF FIXED ASSETS 4,86,67,774 35,84,55,229 APPLICATION OF INCOME CANNOT MORE THAN RS. 35,84,55 ,229 ---------- 35,84,55,229 GROSS TOTAL INCOME 0 TOTAL INCOME 0 (III) ASSESSEE, BEING A SOCIETY, IS REGISTERED U/S 12AA OF THE ACT, ACCORDINGLY ITS INCOME IS EXEMPT U/S 10(23C) OF THE ACT AND CIT (EXEMPTION) JAIPUR VIDE ORDER DT 22/05/2000 HAS ISSUED CERTIFICATE EFF ECTIVE FROM 13 ITA 43 & 647/JP/2017 ACIT VS. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY 11.05.2010 IN THIS REGARD. THE APPELLANT SOCIETY AP PLIES ITS INCOME AND FUNDS ACCRUED FROM INSTITUTES NAMELY GLOBAL INSTITU TE OF TECHNOLOGY & GLOBAL COLLAGE OF TECHNOLOGY FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSE S AS DEFINED U/S 2(15) OF THE ACT. (IV) EVEN IF EXEMPTION IS DENIED U/S 10(23C) OF THE ACT, ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED FOR EXEMPTION U/S 11 & 12 ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED EXEM PTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT NOT U/S 10(23C) OF THE ACT AS CONTENDED BY THE AO IN PG 4 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. ON CAREFUL PERUSAL OF STATUTE , IT IS SEEN THAT EXEMPTION U/S 11 & 12 OF THE ACT IS ALLOWABLE IF TH E ASSESSEE IS REGISTERED U/S 12A A OF THE ACT AND INVOLVED IN CHA RITABLE ACTIVITIES AS PRESCRIBED IN SEC 2(15) OF THE ACT. FURTHER, EXEMPT ION U/S 11 & 12 OF THE ACT IS NOT ALLOWED IF THERE IS VIOLATION OF SEC 13(1) OF THE ACT ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE. MORE SPECIFICALLY, AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SEC 13(1)(D) OF THE ACT, EXEMPTION IS NOT ALLOWED IF FU NDS MEANT FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSE ARE INVESTED FOR THE PERIOD DURI NG THE YEAR IN ANY FORM OTHERWISE PRESCRIBED U/S 11(5) OF THE ACT. (V) VARIOUS COURTS INCLUDING HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL ITAT IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE FOR AY 2008-09 (SUPRA) HAS ALLOWED THE BENEFIT OF QUANTIFIED CARRY FORWARD LOSSES TO THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE INCOME O F THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER, IF THERE IS A POSITIVE INCOME OF THE ASSES SEE FOR THE YEAR, EXEMPTION U/S 11 IS ALLOWABLE SUBJECT TO CONDITIONA LTIES PRESCRIBED U/S 13(1) OF THE ACT BUT IF THE CARRY FORWARD LOSSES AR E ALLOWED TO BE SET OFF THEN THE INCOME WILL BECOME OF NEGATIVE FIGURE AND THEREFORE, EXEMPTION UNDER SEC 11 OF THE ACT CANNOT BE ALLOWED . (VI) ON PERUSAL OF AUDIT REPORT SUBMITTED U/S 12A(B ) OF THE ACT, IT IS SEEN THAT AN AMOUNT OF INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR APPLI ED TO CHARITABLE PURPOSE DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO AY 201 3-14 IS AT RS. 14 ITA 43 & 647/JP/2017 ACIT VS. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY 34028831.36 WHEREAS ADDITION TO FIXED ASSETS IS AT RS. 14,86,67,774/-. HOWEVER, AO IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ON PG 3 HAS MEN TIONED THAT THE ISSUE RELATING TO SEC. 10(23C) OF THE ACT HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE HON'BLE ITAT BENCH JAIPUR IN FAVOUR OF REVENUE BY I TA NO. 1062/JP/2011 DT 15.03.2012 FOR AY 2008-09 AND THE A SSESSEE HAS NOT CHALLENGED THE SAID ORDER, ACCORDINGLY, ASSESSEE IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C) OF THE ACT. AO WHILE FINALIZI NG THE ASSESSMENT HAS MADE FOLLOWING ADDITIONS / DISALLOWANCES: A) INCOME [BEING EXEMPTION DENIED U/S 10(23C)] RS. 35,84,55,229/= (B) EXPENDITURE CLAIMED RS. 37,66,47,698/= SURPLUS/DEFICIT RS.(-)1,81,92,469/- (C) TRANSFER TO GENERAL RESERVE * REGISTRATION RECEIPTS RS.31,92,000/= * BOOK BANK INCOME RS. 2,90,000/= * FORMS/LATE FEES RS.11,65,300/= LD AR OF THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITS THAT UNDER NO PROVISIONS OF ACT RECEIPT OF CAPITAL NATURE CAN BE TAXED AS INCOME AS THE SAID RECEIPTS ARE OF THE NATURE OF CAPITAL RECEIPTS WITH OVERRIDI NG TITLE. ALL THE ABOVE MENTIONED RECEIPTS WERE NONRECURRING IN NATURE AND WERE OF CAPITAL NATURE HENCE THE SAME DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE PRO FIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT; THUS, WERE ADDED TO THE GENERAL RESERVES. ASSESSEE HAS RELIED UPON FOLLOWING JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS: * HAKIM ABDUL HAMID 90ITR 203(FB) * BOMBAY OILSEEDS AND OIL EXCHANGE LTD. 202 ITR 198 (BOM) * HINDUSTAN HOUSING & LAND DEVELOPMENT TRUST LTD 161 ITR 524 (SC) (VII) ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT AO WHILE MAKING A FOREMENTIONED ADDITIONS HAS NOT REFERRED TO ANY INCRIMINATING DOC UMENTS/ MATERIALS FOUND FROM THE SEARCHED PREMISES. FURTHER, ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT AO HAS ACCEPTED THE STATUTORY AUDIT REPORT U/S 12(1)A(B) OF THE ACT AND ALSO NOT POINTED OUT ANY MISTAKE/DISCREPANC Y. IN THIS REGARD, 15 ITA 43 & 647/JP/2017 ACIT VS. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITS THAT IN VIEW OF JUDGMENTS GIVEN BY VARIOUS COURTS INCLUDING HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL ITAT AND HI GH COURTS, ASSESSMENT COMPLETED BY MAKING AFOREMENTIONED ADDIT IONS U/S 143(3) R.W.S 153B(1)(B) OF THE ACT IN ABSENCE OF INCRIMINA TING MATERIALS CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. IN VIEW OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS DISCUSSED ABOVE AND DULY CONSIDERING THE CASE LAWS RELIED UPON BY THE A SSESSEE AND REMAND REPORT AND REJOINDER FILED, I AM OF THE CONSIDERATE VIEW THAT AS THERE IS NO VIOLATION OF SEC 13(1) OF THE ACT, EXEMPTION U/S 11 & 12 OF THE ACT IS ALLOWABLE TO THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS ALSO REGISTERED U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. FURTHER, HERE IN THIS CASE INCOME BEFORE APPLICATIO N OF INCOME IS RS. 35,84,55,229/= AGAINST WHICH ASSESSEE HAS INCURRED EXPENDITURE OF RS. 37,66,47,698/= WHICH CAN TAKE CARE OF FURTHER ADDIT ION MADE OF RS. (-) 1,81,92,469/=. EVEN IF, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF HONBL E ITAT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE (SUPRA), QUANTIFIED CARRIED FORWARD LOSSES BE ALLOWED TO BE SET OFF WITH THE INCOME OF THE ASSESS EE, THEN NET RESULT WILL BE NEGATIVE IN THAT CASE. CONSIDERING ALL THES E FACTS, ADDITIONS MADE OF RS. 5,22,21,300/= & RS. 23,16,700 /= ARE HEREBY DELETED. ASSESSEES APPEAL IN GR NO 2, 3 & 4 ARE ALLOWED. 12. NOW THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT. T HE LD. CIT DR HAS RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ON THE CONTR ARY, THE LD AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 13. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES ON THIS ISSUE. THE FACTUAL ASPECT AS RECORDED BY THE LD. CIT(A) FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSI DERATION THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS REGISTERED U/S 12AA OF THE ACT AND THE INCOME B EFORE APPLICATION OF 16 ITA 43 & 647/JP/2017 ACIT VS. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY INCOME WAS OF RS. 35,84,55,229/- WHILE THE ASSESSEE HAS RECORDED EXPENDITURE TO THE TUNE OF RS. 37,66,47,698/- RESULTANT THERE WA S A DEFICIT. IT IS ALSO PERTINENT TO NOTE THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GRANTED R ELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE ON THE BASIS OF DECISION OF ITAT JAIPUR BENCH IN ITA NO. 1 062/JP/2011 FOR THE A.Y. 2008-09 DATED 15/03/2012 WHEREIN LOSS CARRIED FORWAR D WERE QUANTIFIED WHICH ARE TO BE ALLOWED SET OFF WITH THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE NET RESULT COMES NEGATIVE. THE LD CIT DR WAS NOT ABLE TO CONTR OVERT THE FINDINGS RECORDED BY THE LD. CIT(A), THEREFORE, WE SUSTAIN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) ON THESE ISSUES. 14. IN THE GROUND NO. 7 OF THE APPEAL, THE ISSUE IN VOLVED IS DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,28,688/- ON ACCOUNT OF DELAYED PAY MENT TOWARDS EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION OF ESI. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE ADDITION BY HOLDING AS UNDER: 3.4.2 I HAVE DULY CONSIDERED ASSESSEE'S SUBMISSION AND CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE AO. I HAVE A LSO TAKEN A NOTE OF FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE AS WELL AS CASE LAWS RELIED UPON. THE ISSUE OF DELAYED PAYMENT OF PF/ESI HAS ALREADY BEEN SETTL ED BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT BY FOLLOWING THE PRINCIPL ES LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE APEX COURT IN VINAY CEMENT CASE(SUPRA) HAS DECIDED THE MATTERS IN CASE OF CIT VS. SBBJ [2014] 265 CTR 411 AND CIT VS. UDAIPUR DUGDH UTPADAK SANGH LTD [2014] 265 CTR 59 AND HELD THAT WHERE PF/ESI PAID AFTER DUE DATE UNDER RESPECTIVE ACT BUT BEFORE FILING OF RETURN U/S 139(1) CANNOT BE DISALLOWED U/S 36(1 )(V A) R.W.S. 2(24) (X)OF THE ACT. 17 ITA 43 & 647/JP/2017 ACIT VS. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY IN VIEW OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFOREMENTIONED JUDICIAL DECISIONS, AD DITION OF RS. 1,28,688/- MADE AS INCOME OF APPELLANT ON ACCOUNT O F DELAYED PAYMENT OF EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION OF PF AND ESIC I S HEREBY DELETED. ASSESSEES APPEAL IN GR NO. 5 STANDS ALLOWED. 15. NOW THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT. T HE LD. CIT DR HAS RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ON THE CONTR ARY, THE LD AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 16. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES ON THIS ISSUE. THI S ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF THE HONB LE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SBBJ (2014) 265 CTR 411. THE REFORE, ON THIS ISSUE ALSO, ME UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY, THIS GROUND OF REVENUES APPEAL STAND DISMISSED. 17. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. SD/- SD/- DQY HKKJR HKKXPAN (KUL BHARAT) (BHAGCHAND) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 30 TH OCTOBER , 2017 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SO CIETY (GITS), JAIPUR. 18 ITA 43 & 647/JP/2017 ACIT VS. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 43 & 647/JP/2017) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR