Appeal Details
Counselvise Citation
[2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7579 (ITAT-DELHI)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
2 year(s) 2 month(s) 22 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
12-12-2014
Appeal Filed By
Department
Order Result
Dismissed
Bench Allotted
B
Next Hearing Date
19-11-2014
Assessment Year
2008-2009
Appeal Filed On
20-09-2012
Judgement Text
IN TH E INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : B : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI J.S. REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K. , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO . 4974 / DEL / 201 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200 8 - 0 9 INCOME TAX OFFICER (E), TRUST WARD - III, LAXMI NAGAR DISTT. CENTRE, DELHI - 110092 VS. CHARANJIV CHARITABLE TRUST, 115 - ANSAL BHAWAN, 16, KASTURBA GANDHI MARG, NEW DELHI. (PAN AAATC 0747 N ) (APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) APP ELLANT BY : SHRI PARWINDER KAUR, SR. D.R. RESPONDENT BY: SHRI H. MITTER, CA ORDER PER SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K , J M : 1. TH IS APPEAL AT THE INSTANCE OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE CIT(A) S ORDER DATED 0 7 . 06 .201 2. THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR I S 200 8 - 0 9 . 2. GROUNDS RAISED IN THIS APPEAL ARE AS FOLLOWS: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THERE IS NO VIOLATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(1)(C) READ WITH SECTION 13(2) OF T HE ACT IN RESPECT OF OUTSTANDING ADVANCE OF RS.8,08,736/ - IN THE NAME OF ITA NO. 4974 /DEL /201 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200 8 - 200 9 2 CHARANJIV EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY (A CONCERN COVERED U/S 13 OF THE ACT). 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE ADVA NCE GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE TO CHARANJIV EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY IS NOT IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(1)(D) IN RESPECT OF DEPOSITED IN THE MODES OTHERWISE THAN THE MODES AS PRESCRIBED U/S 11(5) OF THE I.T. ACT. 3 . BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS FOLLOWS. THE ASSESSEE HAD ADVANCED CERTAIN SUM OF RUPEES TO CHARANJIV EDUCATION SOCIETY. THE AO HELD THAT THE ADVANCE OF MONEY BY THE ASSESSEE TO CHARANJIV EDUCATION SOCIETY IS A VIOLATION OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(1)(C) R.W.S. 13(2)(A) AND DENIE D THE BENEFIT OF EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT. THE AO ALSO MENTIONED THAT THE ADVANCE OF MONEY BY THE ASSESSEE TO CHARANJIV EDUCATION SOCIETY IS IN VIOLATION TO SECTION 13(1)(D) OF THE ACT , I N AS MUCH AS THE FUNDS OF THE TRUST WERE DEPOSITED IN MODES OTHER THAN THE MODES PRESCRIBED U/S 11(5) OF THE ACT. 4. THE ASSESSEE BEING AGGRIEVED FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. THE CIT(A) FOLLOWING THE TRIBUNAL S ORDER IN ASSESSEE S OWN CASE FOR A.YS. 2006 - 07 & 2007 - 08 (ITA NOS.3602 & 786/D/2011 O RD ER DATED 30.04.2012) ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. THE REVENUE BEING AGGRIEVED IS AN APPEAL BEFORE US. AT THE VERY OUTSET, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE IDENTICAL ISSUES , WHICH ARE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL WERE CONSIDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEE S OWN CASE FOR A . Y S. 2006 - 07 & 2007 - 08 (SUPRA). IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL ITA NO. 4974 /DEL /201 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200 8 - 200 9 3 FOR A.Y.2006 - 07 WAS AFFIRMED BY THE HON BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE JUDGMENT DATED 18.03.2 014 IN ITA NOS. 321/2013 TO 323/2013. 6 . LD. D.R. PRESENT WAS DULY HEARD. 7 . WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSION AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE FACTS ARE COMMON FOR A.Y S . 2006 - 07, 2007 - 08 AND 2008 - 09 ( AY 2008 - 09 IN THE YEAR UNDER DISPUTE) . THE ONLY DIFFERENCE FROM AY 2007 - 08 AND THE CURRENT ASSESSMENT YEAR WAS THAT T HE ADVAN CE TO CHARANJIV EDUCATION SOCIE TY WHICH WAS AT RS.16,58,736/ - IN A.Y. 2007 - 08 STOOD REDUCE D TO RS.08,50,000/ - IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE HON BLE HIGH COURT IN ASSESSEE S OWN CASE (SUPRA) HAS AF FIRMED THE VIEW OF THE TRIBUNAL, W HERE IN THE EXEMPTION U/S 11 WAS RESTORED. THE RELEVANT FINDING OF THE HON BLE HIGH COURT IN PARAGRAPH 28 OF ITS JUDGMENT READS AS UNDER: - 28. IT IS FURTHER NECESSAR Y TO EXAMINE W HETHER THE AD VA N C E MADE T O CHARANJIV E DUCATIONAL SOCIET Y CAN BE SAID TO BE IN V I O LATION O F THE AFORESAID PROVISIONS . ON THIS ASPECT WE ARE UNABL E T O F IND FAULT W ITH THE APPROACH OF THE TRIBUNAL . THE RELE V ANT FACTS HA V E ALREAD Y BEEN NOTICED B Y US. THE AMOUNTS WERE ADVANCED BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE SOCIET Y W HIC H I N TURN DEPOSITED THEM WITH THE CHHATTISGARH GOVERNMENT FOR THE PURPOS E O F ESTABLISHING A PRIVATE UNIVERSIT Y . THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTARY E V IDENCE IS ON RECORD AND HAS BEEN NOTICED AND RELIED UPON B Y TH E TRIBUNAL . I T I S ONL Y AFTER THE JUDGMENT OF THE SUPREME COURT T HAT THE POSITION B E CAME CER TA I N THAT ENTITIES ESTABLISHED OUTSIDE THE STATE O F CHHAT T I SGA RH CANNOT BE PERMITTED TO OPEN PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES IN ' THE STAT E. THE MONI E S W E RE THEREAFTER RETURNED TO THE ASSESSEE. ON THESE F ACTS IT IS NOT POSSIBL E TO QUESTION T HE CORRECTNESS OF THE VIEW TAKEN B Y ' THE T RIBUNAL . WE AR E ACCORDINGLY OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSING O F FICER W AS NOT RIGHT, AS HELD B Y THE TRIBUNAL, IN DENYING THE EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 ON THE GROUND THAT BY ADVANCING MONIES TO CHARANJIV EDUCATIONAL S OCIET Y THE ASSESSEE COMMITTED A VIOLATION OF SECTION 13(L)(C)(II) READ W ITH S E CTION 1 3 ( 2 ) A N D SECTION 13(3 ) OF THE ACT . ITA NO. 4974 /DEL /201 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200 8 - 200 9 4 8 . IN VIEW OF ABOVE JUDGMENT OF THE HON BLE DELHI HIGH COURT, WE HOLD THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DENYING THE EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT FOR THE REASON THAT ASSESSEE HAS ADVANCED MONEY TO CHARANJIV EDUCATION SOCIETY IN VIOLATION OF SECTION 13(1)(C) R.W.S. 13(2) OF THE ACT. IT IS ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 9 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. TH E DECISION WA S PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 2 TH DECEMBER , 201 4 . SD/ - SD/ - ( J.S. REDDY ) (GEORGE GEORGE K.) A CCOUNTANT MEMBER J UDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 1 2 TH DECEMBER , 201 4 . AKS/ - COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASST . REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI
