The DCIT, 1(1), Bhopal V. M/s Rishiraj Memorial Education and Welfare Society, Bhopal

ITA 49/IND/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7142 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-12-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 23-05-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARUN DEWAN
• Section: 260A

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.49/IND/2011 A.Y. 2003-04 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(1), BHOPAL ... APPELLANT VS RISHIRAJ MEMORIAL EDUCATION AND WELFARE SOCIETY BHOPAL PAN AACCR-5578D .. RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI ARUN DEWAN SR. DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUMIT NEMA DATE OF HEARING 24.11.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 20.12.2011 2 O R D E R PER R.C. SHRMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 2.1.2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 ON THE FOL LOWING GROUND :- ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE CIT(APPEAL) HAS ERRED IN DIRECTING THE A.O. TO ALLO W EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C) FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE ITAT IN ITA NO. 396/IND/2009 DATED 04.11.2010 IN TH E ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE A.Y. 2005-06, WHEREAS THE DEPARTMENT HAS NOT ACCEPTED THE ITATS DECISION AND APPEAL U/S 260A IS PENDING BEFORE HONBLE HIGH COURT. 2. IT IS CLEAR FROM THE GROUND ITSELF THAT EXACTLY SIMILAR ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THIS BENCH OF THE TRIBUNA L VIDE ORDER DATED 4.11.2010 IN THE ASSESSEES FAVOUR BY DISMISSING THE REVENUES APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 3 2005-06. THE PRECISE OBSERVATIONS OF THE COMMISSIO NER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ARE AS UNDER :- THE DECISION OF MY LD.PREDECESSOR AND JUDGMENT OF I TAT HAS BEEN CONSIDERED AND RELYING ON THE ORDER OF THE HON BLE ITAT, INDORE BENCH, THE APPELLANT IS ENTITLED TO EXEMPTIO N U/S 10(23C) AND SUCH EXEMPTION IS TO BE GIVEN TO ANY NC OME OF THE APPELLANT AS LONG AS IT IS UTILISED FOR THE EDUCATI ONAL OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY. ALL THE FUNDS RECEIVED HAVE BEEN UTILI SED BY THE SOCIETY IN CONSTRUCTION OF COLLEGE BUILDING AND VAR IOUS OTHER RELATED INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITIES. THUS, THE INCOME IS UTILISED FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES AND IS ACCORDINGLY ENTITLED TO EXEMPTION. THE ADDITION OF RS. 59,55,030/- CONFIRMED IS ENTITL ED TO EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C). I ALSO RELY ON THE JUDGMENT S OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL MP HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF AGRAWAL WAREHOUSING AND LEASING LTD. VS. CIT REPORTED IN 25 7 ITR 235 AS WELL AS IN THE CASE OF GOVINDRAM SAKSERIA CHARIT Y TRUST VS. ITO REPORTED IN 168 ITR 387 WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THA T THE ORDERS PASSED BY THETRIBUNAL ARE BINDING ON ALL THE REVENU E AUTHORITIES FUNCTIONING UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE TRIBUNAL. THIS GROUND IS DECIDED ACCORDINGLY. 4 3. THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES DURING THE YEAR WITH REGARD TO THE GROUND RAISED ARE THE SAME, THEREFORE , FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 4.11.2 010 IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STAND DISMISSED. SD SD (JOGINDER SINGH) (R.C. SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DECEMBER 20.12. , 2011 COPY TO APPELLANT,RESPONDENT,CIT, CIT(A), DR DN/-