ACIT, Circle, Panchkula V. M/s Panchkula Golf Club, Panchkula

ITA 463/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3935 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-10-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 13-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N D GUPTASR
• Keywords: Tax effect; Capital receipt

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH B CHANDIGARH !, ' # $ . .. . & , '( # BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM & DR. B.R.R.KUMAR, AM ./ ITA NO. 463/CHD/2018 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 THE ACIT, PANCHKULA CIRCLE, PANCHKULA. VS M/S PANCHKULA GOLF CLUB, SECTOR-03, PANCHKULA. ./ PAN NO: AAAAP5757C / APPELLANT / RESPONDENT ! / REVENUE BY : SHRI N.D. GUPTA,SR.DR '# ! / ASSESSEE BY : NONE $ % #&/ DATE OF HEARING : 18.07.2018 '()* #&/ D ATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03.10.2018 ')/ ORDER PER DIVA SINGH THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE ASSAI LING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 15.02.2018 OF CIT(A) PANCHKULA P ERTAINING TO 201415 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CI T(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN TREATING THE ASSESSEE AS MUTUAL CONCERN AND ALLOWING THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE BY DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,07,89,229/- MADE B Y THE AO OH ACCOUNT OF MEMBERS CONTRIBUTION. 2. WHETHER ON THE FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE TH E LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN TREATING THE ASSESSEE AS MUTUAL CONCERN AND ALLO WING THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE AND DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 34,55,110/- MADE BY TH E AO ON ACCOUNT OF TEMPORARY MEMBERS/NON-MEMBERS CONTRIBUTION. 3. WHETHER ON THE FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE TH E LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN TREATING THE ASSESSEE AS MUTUAL CONCERN AND ALLO WING THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE AND DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 10,19,510/- MADE BY TH E AO ON ACCOUNT OF RENTAL INCOME. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF THE RESPONDENT. HOWEVER ON CONSIDERING THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AN D AFTER HEARING THE LD. SR.DR IT WAS DEEMED APPROPRIATE TO PROCEED WITH THE PRESENT APPEAL EX-PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE RESPONDENT ON MERITS. THE L D. SR. DR RELIES UPON THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 3. THE RELEVANT FACTS OF THE CASE AS FOUND DISCUSSED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE ASSESSEES CLAIM THAT FROM 200809 ASSESSMENT ITA -463/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2014-15 PAGE 2 OF 5 YEAR THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN ASSESSED AS A MUTUAL CONC ERN WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT AND THE ISSUE HAD BEEN CHALLENGED BE FORE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT. IT IS A MATTER OF RECORD THAT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE WAS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN ON THE GROUNDS OF MONETARY LIMIT FIX ED BY THE CBDT. THE FOLLOWING EXTRACT FROM THE ORDER DATED 01/03/2016 IN ITA 4 36 OF 2015 (O&M) WHICH HAS BEEN EXTRACTED IN THE ASSESSMEN T ORDER READS AS UNDER : ' LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT REVENUE STATES TH AT THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT CASE IS 10,95,740/-. HE SUBMITTED THAT KEEPING IN VIEW T HE CIRCULAR NO 21/2015, DATED 10.12.2015 ISSUED BY C B D T, NEW DELHI, THE PRESENT APPEAL MA Y BE DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. HOWEVER, LIBERTY BE GRANTED TO TH4 REVENUE TO FILE AN APPLIC ATION FOR REVIVAL OF THE APPEAL IN CASE SOMETHING SURVIVES THEREIN. 4. IN THE SAID BACKGROUND THE ASSESSING OFFICER RELYING U PON THE DECISIONS OF THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF CHELMSFORD CLUB VS CIT (2000) 243 ITR 89 (S.C) AND CIT VS BANKIPUR CLUB 226 ITR 971 HE LD THAT THE THREE TESTS OF MUTUALITY WERE NOT FULFILLED; NAMELY, (I) THE IDEN TITY BETWEEN CONTRIBUTORS AS A BENEFICIARY; B) THE OBJECTIVES OF MUTUAL BENEFIT; AND C) THE ACTUAL ACTIVITIES RESULTING IN EITHER MUTUAL BENEFIT OR RE TURN OF THE CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE CONTRIBUTORS. ACCORDINGLY, IT WAS HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT FULFILL THESE REQUIREMENTS. THE ASSESSEE WAS REQU IRED TO ADDRESS THE SAID POSITION. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS, THE AS SESSING OFFICER CONCLUDED THE ISSUE IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER: (A) THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN RECEIPTS OF RS, 1,07,89, 229/- AND NO INCOME TAX HAS BEEN PAID ON IT. THE ASSESSEE WAS SHOW CAUSED VIDE NOTE SHEET DATED 5.9.2016 AS WHY THE AMOUNT OF RECEIPT BE TAXED; FOR WHICH NO REPLY WAS RECEIVED EXCEPT THE DISCUSSION ON THE STATUS OF THE CASE AT DIFFERENT STAGES. HENC E THE MUTUAL CONCEPT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AS MENTIONED ABOVE THAT THE BODY IS GOVE RNED BY THE PRESENT GOVT OF HARYANA OFFICERS. AS SUCH, THE AMOUNT OF RECEIPT IS ADDED BACK TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. I AM SATISFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CONC EALED THE PARTICULARS OF INCOME/FURNISHED INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME A ND AS SUCH, THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(L)(C ) OF THE IT ACT, 1961 ARE INITIATED AND NOTICE IS BEING SENT SEPARATELY. (B) THE ASSESSEE VIDE SUBMISSION DATED 2.9.2016 SHO WED RECEIPTS OF RS. 34.55,110/- FROM TEMPORARY MEMBERS/NON MEMBERS. NO TAX HAS BEEN PAID ON IT. THE ASSESSEE VIDE NOTE SHEET DATED 5.9.2016 WAS SHOW CA USED AS WHY THE RECEIPTS SHOULD NOT BE TAXED. NO REPLY WAS RECEIVED EXCEPT THE REP LY DATED 2.9.2016 BEFORE SHOW CAUSE AND THE SHOW CAUSE WAS GIVEN AFTER DETAILED D ISCUSSION ON THE REPLY DT 2.9.2016. HENCE, THE INCOME ABOVE SAID AMOUNT IS FOUND CONCEALED AND THE SAME IS ADDED BACK TO THE INCOME OF THE ASS ESSEE. 1 AM SATISFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CONCEALED THE PARTICULARS OF INCOME/FU RNISHED INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME AND AS SUCH, THE PENA LTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(L)(C ) OF THE IT ACT. 1961 ARE INITIATED AND NOTICE IS BEING SENT SEPARATELY. (C ) THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN INTEREST ON EARNED O N FDRS AND SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNTS AT RS. 90,35,070/-. THE SAME HAS NO: BEEN SHOWN IN THE INCOME TAX RETURN AND NO TAX HAS BEEN PAID ON IT. THE INTEREST AMOUNT HAS NO CONCEPT OF MUTUAL CONCERN AND HAS TO BE TAXED. THE ASSESSEE WAS SHOW CAUSE VIDE NOTE SHEET DATED 5.9.2016 FOR WHICH NO EXPLANATION WAS RECEIVED. HENCE, THE SAME IS ADDED BACK TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. I AM SATISFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CONC EALED THE PARTICULARS OF ITA -463/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2014-15 PAGE 3 OF 5 INCOME/FURNISHED INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME A ND AS SUCH, THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(L)(C ) OF THE IT ACT, 1961 ARE INITIATED AN D NOTICE IS BEING SENT SEPARATELY. (D) THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN RS. 10,19,510/- AS RENTA L INCOME RECEIPTS. THE SAME IS NOT FOUND REFLECTED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME AND NO TAX HAS BEEN PAID ON THIS. THE ASSESSEE VIDE NOTE SHEET DATED 5.9.2016 WAS SHOW CA USED FOR MAKING ADDITION AND NO REPLY IS RECEIVED. HENCE, THE SAME IS ADDED BACK TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. I AM SATISFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CONCEALED THE PA RTICULARS OF INCOME/FURNISHED INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME AND AS SUCH, THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(L)(C ) OF THE IT ACT, 1961 ARE INITIATED AND NO TICE IS BEING SENT SEPARATELY. 5. AGGRIEVED BY THIS THE ASSESSEE WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). ADDRESSING THE ADDITIONS MADE IN PARA 2(A)&(B), THE ASSESS EES SUBMISSIONS HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED IN PARA 5.1. CONSIDERING THE SAME, THE CIT(A) RELYING UPON THE ITAT ORDER DATED 01/09/2016 IN 201011 ASSE SSMENT YEAR ALLOWED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE IN PARAS 5.2 AND 5.3. THOUGH A GROUND HAS BEEN RAISED, HOWEVER, NO CONTRARY FACT, SUBMISSION OR DISTIN CTION WAS BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE BENCH BY THE LD. SR.DR. NOTH ING WAS PLACED BEFORE THE BENCH TO SHOW THAT THE SAID ORDER HAD BEEN UPSET BY A HIGHER FORUM. WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY THIS CIT(A) IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER : 5. GROUNDS NO. L & 2 ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ADDIT IONS OF RS. 1,07,89,229/- AND RS.34,55,110/- ON ACCOUNT OF MEMBERS' AND TEMPORARY MEMBERS CONTRIBUTION. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE AO ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE CLAIM ABOUT THE CLUB AS A MUTUAL CONCERN. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ASSESSEE'S REPLY, THE AO NOTED THAT THE CLUB IS NOT A MUTUAL CONCERN AS ITS GOVERNING B ODY COMPRISES OF CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF HARYANA AS PRESIDENT, PRINCIPAL SECRE TARY TO CHIEF MINISTRY SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF HARYANA AS SR. VICE PRESIDENT, FINANC IAL COMMISSIONER, TOW R N COUNTRY PLANNING, GOVERNMENT OF HARYANA AS A VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR, HUDA AS MEMBER AND THE OTHER MEMBERS ARE ALSO NOMINATED BY THE PRESIDENT. THIS INDICATES THAT THE MANAGEMENT & CONTROL OVER THE ASSESSEE CLU B WAS WITH THE STATE GOVERNMENT. THE CLUB WAS NOT ASSESSED AS MUTUAL CONCERN IN A.Y. 2007-08 AS IT FAILED TO FULFILL THE THREE TESTS OF MUTUALITY AS LAID DOWN BY THE HON'BLE SUPR EME COURT IN CHELMSFORD CLUB VS. CIT 243 ITR 89 AND IN CIT VS. BANKIPUR CLUB LTD. 226 IT R 97. THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AS A MUTUAL CONCERN WAS ALSO NOT ACCEPTED AS THE ASSESSE E IN THE INCOME TAX RETURN HAS NO WHERE STATED THAT PANCHKULA GOLF CLUB IS A MUTUAL C ONCERN. THE FORM USED TO . FILE INCOME TAX RETURN WAS NOT APPLICABLE IN THIS CASE. FURTHER, AO NOTED THAT THE SUM OF RS. 1,07,89,229/- AND RS. 34,55, 110/- AS ONE TIME ENTR ANCE FEE CONTRIBUTION FROM THE MEMBERS AND TEMPORARY MEMBERS RESPECTIVELY IS A REVENUE REC EIPT WHEREAS THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN SAME AS CAPITAL RECEIPT ON THE BASIS OF MUTUA LITY. SINCE, THE OBJECTIVE OF MUTUAL BENEFIT IS NOT FULFILLED, THEREFORE, CONTRIBUTION O F RS. 1,07,89,229/- AND RS.34,55,110/- RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE CLUB FROM THE MEMBERS DURI NG THE YEAR WAS HELD TO BE THE TAXABLE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. IT IS SEEN THAT CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH ARE EXTRACTED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER, WE NOTE THAT LARGELY THE ASSESSEE RELIES UPON THE VIEW TAKEN IN 2008-09 ASSESSM ENT YEAR IN ITA 813/2013 THE RELEVANT EXTRACT THE SUBMISSIONS IS REPRODUCED HE REUNDER : 5.3 CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE, LEGAL PROVISIONS AND JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS, I HOLD THAT THE RATIO LAID BY HON'BLE ITAT IN APPELLANT'S OWN CASE FOR THE A.Y. 2008-09 (SUPRA) IS APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT APPEAL. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF HON'BLE ITAT , THE ADDITION OF ADDITION OF RS. 1,07,89,229/- AND RS.3G55,UO/- MADE BY THE AO ON A CCOUNT OF ON ACCOUNT OF MEMBERS' ITA -463/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2014-15 PAGE 4 OF 5 CONTRIBUTION AND TEMPORARY MEMBERS CONTRIBUTION IS DELETED. THESE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE ALLOWED. EVEN OTHERWISE THE MEMBER RECEIPTS ARE ALREADY CRED ITED IN THE INCOME AND EXPENDITURE AMOUNT WHERE THE NET EFFECT IS A LOSS F OR THE YEAR AS HAS BEEN RIGHTLY SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT IN ITS SUBMISSIONS. 7. WE FIND ON A READING OF THE FINDING ARRIVED AT BY THE CI T(A) IN PARA 5.2 THAT THE SAID VIEW WAS FOLLOWED IN 201011 ASSESSMENT YEAR ALSO. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY CHANGE IN FACTS, CIRCUMSTANCES AND POSITION OF LAW, WE FIND NO GOOD REASON TO VARY THE CONCLUSION ARRIVED AT. THE RELEVANT FINDING OF THE CIT(A) IS EXTRACTED HEREUNDER : 5.2 I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE FACTS OF THE CA SE AND WRITTEN SUBMISSION FILED BY THE APPELLANT. THIS ISSUE IS DECIDED BY MY PREDECESSOR IN THE APPE LLANT'S OWN CASE FOR THE A.Y. 2010-11 IN APPEAL NO. 32/PKL/13-14 DATED 01.09.2016 . THE FINDINGS IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER :- '9. I HAVE GONE THOUGH THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND W RITTEN SUBMISSION FILED BY THE APPELLANT. IT IS NOTED THAT THE AO HAS HELD THE APPELLANT CLUB AS NON MUTUAL CONCERN ON THE GROUND THAT THE APPELLANT HAS NOT STATED ABOUT BEING A MUTUAL CONCERN IN ITS RETURN OF INCOME WHICH WAS FILED IN THE FORM NOT APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT. FURTHER, T HE AO HAS CONSIDERED THE DECISION IN APPELLANT'S OWN CASE FOR A.Y. 2007-08 W HERE IT WAS NOT CONSIDERED AS MUTUAL CONCERN BY APPLYING THE JUDGME NTS OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT. ACCORDINGLY, THE AO CONSIDERED THE C ONTRIBUTION OF RS.84,65,816/- FROM MEMBERS AS INCOME OF THE APPELL ANT. HOWEVER, IN THE APPELLANT'S OWN CASE FOR A.Y. 2008-09, THE HON 'BL E ITAT, CHANDIGARH AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE GAVE THE FOLLOWIN G DECISION :- '13. THOUGH WE HAVE CLEARLY HELD ABOVE THAT ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO EXEMPTION UNDER THE CONCEPT OF MUTUALITY AND THE ENTRANCE FEE HAS TO BE TREATED AS CAPITAL FEE BUT AT THE SAM E TIME WE FIND THAT IT IS NOT CLEAR FROM RECORD THE NATURE OF RECEIPTS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE WHETHER THE SAME IS FROM M EMBERS OR NOT AND THESE FACTS HAVE NOT BEEN EXAMINED BY THE A SSESSING OFFICER OR THE CIT(A), THEREFORE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) AND REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION TO VERIFY THE NATURE OF RE CEIPT AND IF SAME IS FROM THE MEMBERS THEN ALLOW THE EXEMPTION U NDER THE CONCEPT OF MUTUALITY OTHERWISE THE CASE BE DECIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.' 9.1 THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF HON'BLE IT AT, THE APPELLANT IS ENTITLED TO EXEMPTION UNDER THE CONCEPT OF MUTUALIT Y AND THE ENTRANCE FEE HAS TO BE TREATED AS CAPITAL FEE AND THE RECEIPTS F ROM MEMBERS HAVE BEEN ALLOWED FOR EXEMPTION UNDER THE CONCEPT OF MUTUALIT Y. THE AO HAS CONSIDERED THE CONTRIBUTION FROM MEMBERS OF RS. 84, 65,816/- AS TAXABLE INCOME. HOWEVER, AS PER THE DECISION IN THE APPELLA NT'S OWN CASE, THE CONTRIBUTIONFROM MEMBERS IS EXEMPTED UNDER THE CONC EPT OF MUTUALITY. THEREFORE, THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE ALLOWED. ' 8. ACCORDINGLY, THE DEPARTMENTAL GROUND IS DISMISSED. 9. THE NEXT ADDITION ASSAILED BY THE REVENUE IN THE PRES ENT PROCEEDINGS HAS BEEN SUMMED UP BY THE CIT(A) IN PARA 6 OF HIS ORDER WHEREIN CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS ADVANCED IN PARA 6.1, RELIEF HA S BEEN GRANTED IN PARA 6.2. FOR READY REFERENCE THE RELEVANT PARAS ARE EXTRACTED HEREUNDER: 6.1 DURING APPELLANT PROCEEDINGS, THE COUNSEL FOR T HE APPELLANT SUBMITTED AS UNDER :- ITA -463/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2014-15 PAGE 5 OF 5 'DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE ASSESSEE HAD DECLARED TOTAL RECEIPT OF RS.2,32,79,409/- AS PER INCOME & EXPENDITURE ACCOUN T, WHICH ALSO INCLUDE THE RENTAL INCOME OF RS.10,19,510/-. SINCE, THE AMOUNT OF RS.10, 19,510/- IS ALREADY INCLUDED IN THE ADDITION MADE VIDE GROUND NO. 2, THEREFORE, QUESTION OF SEPARATE ADDITION OF RS.10,19,510/- ON ACCOUNT OF RENTAL INCOME DOES NOT ARISE AT ALL AND ADDITION OF RS.10,19,510/- MAY PLEASE BE DELETED. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ABOVE, IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE SAID RENTAL RECEIPTS -WERE ALREADY CREDITED IN THE INCOME & EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND NET EFFECT OF INCOME & EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT IS LOSS AND NOT AN INCOME. ALSO AS EVIDENT FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WERE NEVER REJECTED BY THE LD. AO. BY M AKING AN ADDITION OF THE INCOME ALREADY RECOGNIZED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, WITHOUT REJECT ING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, WOULD ACTUALLY LEAD TO DOUBLE TAXATION OF THE SAME INCOME. FURTHER , IT IS SETTLED ISSUE THAT SAME INCOME CANNOT BE TAXED TWICE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, LD. AO IGNORING THE BASIC OF TAXABILITY OF TRANSACTION IMPOSED THE TAX ON THE SA ME AMOUNT OF RS.10,19,510/- BY MAKING ADDITION TO THE RETURNED INCOME. THE JUSTIFIES THAT THE ADDITION WAS MADE WITHOUT MAKING APPLICATION OF MIND, AS SAME INCOME CANNOT TAXED TW ICE IN THE HANDS OF THE SAME ASSESSEE. ' 6.2 I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND W RITTEN SUBMISSION FILED BY THE APPELLANT AND THE COPY OF INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT ALONGWIT H SCHEDULES. IT IS NOTED FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT ADDITION WAS MADE BECAUSE THE AR OF THE APPELLANT DID NOT RESPOND TO THE SHOW CAUSE GIVEN BY THE AO IN THIS RESPECT. IT IS OBSERVED THAT REST AURANT/BAR/PRACTICE RANGE/CADDY RENT RECEIVED FROM TEMPORARY MEMBERS AND OTHERS WAS AT RS. 10,19,510/- AND THESE RECEIPTS WERE FORMING A PART OF TEMPORARY MEMBERS RECEIPTS AT RS.34,55,110/- AND TH US INCLUDED IN THE TOTAL INCOME OF RS.2,32,79,409/- AS PER SCHEDULE 5 OF AUDITED ACCOU NTS. FURTHER, THE INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT SHOWS A NET DEFICIT BEING EXCESS OF EXPENDI TURE OVER INCOME. THEREFORE, I FIND THAT THE CONTENTION MADE BY THE APPELLANT IN ITS SUBMISSION IS CORRECT AND ACCORDINGLY THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF RENT RECEIPTS IS ORDERED TO BE DELETED. THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS ALLOWED. 10. THE LD. SR.DR RELIES ON THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. HOWEVE R, THE FACTS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION BY THE CIT(A) FOR ARRIVING AT THE DECISION WERE NOT ASSAILED. 11. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. IN THE FACTS AS THEY STAND, WE FIND NO GOOD REA SON TO VARY THE CONCLUSION ARRIVED AT. BEING SATISFIED BY THE REASONING AND FINDING, DEPARTMENTAL GROUND IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY REBUTTAL ON FACTS IS DISMISS ED. 12. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03.10. 2018. SD/- SD/- ( . .. . & ) ( ! ) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) (DIVA SINGH) '( #/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ' #/ JUDICIAL MEMBER + , (+ #,- .-#/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT - 2. / THE RESPONDENT - 3. $ /#/ CIT 4. $ /# ()/ THE CIT(A) 5. -23 #4, & 4, 67839/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 38 :%/ GUARD FILE (+ $ / BY ORDER, ; / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR