MALLIKARJUN SCHOOL SOCIETY, PITHORAGARH V. ITO, EXEMPTION, DEHRADUN

ITA 4839/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4148 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-01-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 31-07-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: K SAMPAT; V RAJA KUMAR ADVS
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 12AA; 12; 154; 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.4839/DEL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 MALLIKARJUN SCHOOL SOCIETY, AINCHOLI, PITHORAGARH, UTTARAKHAND. VS. ITO, EXEMPTION, DEHRADUN. PAN : AABTM6832B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI K. SAMPAT & SHRI V. RAJA KUMAR, ADVS. DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI ARUN KUMAR YADAV, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 02-01-2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10-01-2018 O R D E R PER R. K. PANDA, AM : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER DATED 24.04.2017 OF CIT(A), HALDWANI RELATING TO ASSESSME NT YEAR 2013-14. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER :- 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)'S ORDER IS ENTIRELY ERRONEOU S IN LAW & FACTS OF THE CASE. HE HAS CONFIRMED THE ADDITIONS MADE BY AO FOR RS. 12,22,500/- ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE 12AA REGISTRATION DATED 29.11.2016 GRANTED TO SOCIE TY DOES NOT COVER THE FY 2012-13. 2. THE LD CIT(APPEAL) HALDWANI PASSED THE ORDER WIT HOUT PROPERLY UNDERSTANDING THE PROVISIONS OF FINANCE ACT 2014 W. E.F 01.10.2014. AS PER SECTION 12A(2) AND IT'S FIRST AND SECOND PROVISOS IT WAS CL ARIFIED THAT ALL THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 11 AND 12 SHALL APPLY IN RESPECT OF THE APP LICATIONS FILED FOR REGISTRATION OF SECTION 12AA AFTER 01.06.2007 IF THE OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY REMAIN SAME. 3. THE LD CIT (APPEAL) COULD NOT UNDERSTAND THE INT ENTION OF LEGISLATURE THAT NO TAX CAN BE LEVIED ONLY BECAUSE OF NON REGISTRATION FOR THE YEARS PRECEDING THE YEAR IN WHICH REGISTRATION WAS GRANTED TO SOCIETY IF OBJECT S ARE SAME ON THE BASIS OF WHICH REGISTRATION WAS GRANTED AFTER 01.10.2014. THEREFOR E THE ORDER OF LD CIT (APPEAL) HALDWANI IS ARBITRARY, ERRONEOUS, UNJUSTIFIED, UNLA WFUL AND THEREFORE MUST BE QUASHED WITH DIRECTION FOR APPROPRIATE RELIEF. 2 ITA NO.4839/DEL/2017 4. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LIBERTY TO ADD/ALTER O R VARY ANY GROUND OF THE APPEAL EITHER BEFORE THE DATE OF HEARING OR AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 3. FACTS OF THE CASE, IN BRIEF, ARE THAT THE ASSESS EE SOCIETY FIELD ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 28.03.2014 DECLARING NIL INCOME. THE ASS ESSEE CLAIMED ITS INCOME AS EXEMPT. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS NOT IN R ECEIPT OF EITHER OF THE DOCUMENTS I.E. REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OR APPROVAL FO R EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C)(VI). HE ACCORDINGLY DETERMINED THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSE E AT RS.12,22,500/-. 4. IN APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) FOLLOWING HIS ORDER FO R ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 UPHELD THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE G ROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY HAS BEEN GRANTED REGISTRATION U/S 12AA W.E. F. 01.04.2013 VIDE ORDER U/S 154 OF CIT (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW DATED 16.11.2016 AN D THE SAME DOES NOT COVER ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. 5. AGGRIEVED WITH SUCH ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 6. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF HEAR ING FILED A COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE UTTARKHAND HIGH COURT IN AS SESSEES OWN CASE VIDE WRIT PETITION (M/S) NO.377 OF 2013 ORDER DATED 17.1 1.2017 WHEREIN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT HAS DIRECTED THE DEPARTMENT TO GRANT EXE MPTION TO THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY U/S 10(23C)(VI). HE ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH THE DIRECTION TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH. 3 ITA NO.4839/DEL/2017 7. LD. DR HAS NO OBJECTION FOR THE SAME. 8. CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS OF THE CAS E AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, I DEEM IT PROPER TO RESTORE THE ISSUE TO T HE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH THE DIRECTION TO ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE AFRESH I N THE LIGHT OF THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE. NEEDLES S TO SAY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL GIVE DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD T O THE ASSESSEE AND DECIDE THE ISSUE AS PER LAW. I HOLD AND DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 10 TH JANUARY, 2018. SD/- (R. K. PANDA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 10-01-2018. SUJEET COPY OF ORDER TO: - 1) THE APPELLANT 2) THE RESPONDENT 3) THE CIT 4) THE CIT(A) 5) THE DR, I.T.A.T., NEW DELHI BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI