Dy. C.I.T., Circle-1, Aligarh V. Rajkiya Audyodik Krishi Pradarshani, Aligarh

ITA 500/AGR/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0321 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-03-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 13-03-2013
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 19-10-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: AVAN KUMAR SINGH
• Section: 12; 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.L. GEHLOT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.500/AGR/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AO), VS. RAJKIYA AUDYOGIKKRISHI CIRCLE-1, ALIGARH. PARADARSHANI, G.T. ROAD, ALIGARH. (PAN : AAATG 9972 B). (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI WASEEM ARSHAD, SR. D.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AVAN KUMAR SINGH, C.A. DATE OF HEARING : 13.03.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15.03.2013 ORDER PER A.L. GEHLOT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 03.07.2012 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), GHAZIABAD FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. THE LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PARTIES SUBMITTED THAT THE FACTS OF THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THIS APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2009-10 ARE IDENTICA L TO THE CASE FOR A.Y. 2005-06 AND 2006-07. THE A.O. MADE ADDITIONS BY DISALLOWIN G OUT OF VARIOUS EXPENSES AND 2 ITA NO.500/AGR/2012 A.Y. 2009-10 ASSESSED TOTAL INCOME AT RS.4,07,07,980/-. THE VAR IOUS EXPENSES DISALLOWED BY THE A.O. ARE AS UNDER :- RS.1,57,382/- ON ACCOUNT OF HOLI MILAN AND ROZA IFT AR CELEBRATION RS.4,80,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF POLICE KALYAN NIDHI RS.8,510/- ON ACCOUNT OF ATITHI SATKAR/HOTEL RS.58,079/- ON ACCOUNT OF GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTE NANCE RS.33,25,997/- ON ACCOUNT OF LIGHT AND SOUND SYSTEM & CULTURAL SHOW NIGHTS RS.4,77,305/- OTHER EXPENSES AS PER GROUND WHEREAS ADDITION IS OF RS.21,69,569/- RS.8,01,941/- WHITE WASH ETC. 3. THE CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION FOLLOWING HIS OR DER FOR A.Y. 2006-07. 4. AFTER HEARING THE LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PAR TIES, WE NOTICE THAT ON IDENTICAL SET OF FACTS THE ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED B Y I.T.A.T., AGRA BENCH IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ITA NOS.72 & 73/AGR/2011 FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06 & 2006-07, ORDER DATED 31.08.2012. THE FINDING OF I.T.A.T., AGRA BENCH IN THE SAID ORDER DATED 31.08.2012 IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER :- 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PA RTIES AND RECORDS PERUSED. WE NOTICE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS G RANTED REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A/12AA OF THE ACT DATED 09.10.2000 W.E.F. 01.04.99. THIS REGISTRATION HAS NOT BEEN FOUND CANCELLED. TH E OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY ARE CHARITABLE AS ITS AIMS AND ACTIVITIES A RE TO PROMOTE SMALL SCALE INDUSTRIES, AGRICULTURISTS, ARTISTS ETC. THE CIT(A) NOTED THAT THE CLAUSES OF MEMORANDUM & ARTICLE OF ASSOCIATION MENT IONS THAT INCOME OR FUNDS ARE NOT DIVISIBLE AMONGST THE MEMBE RS OF THE TRUST AND NO BENEFITS ARE TO GO TO ANY INDIVIDUAL, THE EN TIRE FUNDS OR ANY SURPLUS GENERATED ARE DOVETAILED INTO THE AVOWED OF CHARITABLE 3 ITA NO.500/AGR/2012 A.Y. 2009-10 ACTIVITIES OF THE SOCIETY. THE CIT(A) HAS ALSO NOT ED THE FACT THAT THE ENTIRE RENTAL INCOME GENERATED IS BEING PLOUGHED BA CK FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE SOCIETY. THE CIT(A) HAS FOLLOWED H IS PREDECESSORS ORDER FOR A.Y. 2006-07 IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE WHERE IN IT WAS STATED THAT THE A.O. CANNOT SIMPLY OVERRIDE THE ORDER OF C IT, AGRA BY POINTING OUT CERTAIN DEFECTS IN CONSTITUTION OF THE SOCIETY AND PROCEED TO DISALLOW THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION U/S 11 & 12 OF T HE ACT. ACTION OF THE A.O. WAS BEYOND JURISDICTION. IT HAS ALSO BEEN NOTICED IN THAT ORDER THAT THE SOCIETY WAS ALLOWED REGISTRATION UND ER SECTION 12A/12AA OF THE ACT DATED 9 TH OCTOBER, 2000 AND THE ASSESSEES CASES WERE SCRUTINIZED FOR THE A.YS. 1989-90, 1990-91 & 1 995-96 WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT INCOME OF THE SOCIETY WAS EXEMPT. AS REGARDS THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE REG ARDING SOCIETYS PROPERTY, WE AGREE WITH THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. A UTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE THAT PROPERTY WORD USED IN SECTION 11 IS A TERM OF WIDEST IMPORT, AND SUBJECT TO ANY LIMITATION OR QUA LIFICATION WHICH THE CONTEXT MIGHT REQUIRE, IT SIGNIFIES EVERY POSSIBLE INTEREST WHICH A PERSON CAN ACQUIRE, HOLD AND ENJOY. BUSINESS WOU LD UNDOUBTEDLY BE PROPERTY, UNLESS THERE IS SOMETHING TO THE CONTRA RY IN THE ENACTMENT. THERE IS NOTHING IN THE LANGUAGE OF SECTION 11 WHIC H RESTRICTS IN ANY MANNER THE NORMAL AND ACCEPTED MEANING OF THE WORD PROPERTY. IN THIS REGARD, WE MAY REFER THE JUDGMENT OF APEX COUR T IN THE CASE OF J.K. TRUST VS. CIT, 32 ITR 535 (SC). HONBLE BOMBA Y HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF A.J. PATEL VS. CIT, 97 ITR 683 (BOM) HE LD THAT THE RIGHT TO EXPLOIT SPACE ON EITHER SIDE OF AN OVERBRIDGE FOR A DVERTISEMENTS IS A PROPERTY. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, WE DO NOT FIND ANY SUBSTANCE IN THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. DEPARTMENTA L REPRESENTATIVE, THEREFORE, THE SAME IS DISMISSED. 8. AS REGARDS THE OBJECTION OF THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE IN RESPECT OF DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE, WE NOTIC E THAT THE CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY HELD THAT THE A.O. HIMSELF ACCEPTED THO SE EXPENSES INCURRED FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE OBJECT OF THE SOCI ETY AS HE MADE ADHOC DISALLOWANCE IN PART. THE CIT(A) AFTER VERIF YING THE FACTS SATISFIED THAT EXPENSES WERE INCURRED FOR CHARITABL E PURPOSES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE OBJECT OF THE SOCIETY. 4 ITA NO.500/AGR/2012 A.Y. 2009-10 9. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A ) IS, THEREFORE, CONFIRMED. 10. AS STATED ABOVE THAT SINCE THE FACTS OF THE CAS E FOR A.Y. 2006-07 ARE IDENTICAL TO THE CASE FOR A.Y. 2005-06 OF WHICH DETAILED DISCUSSION HAS BEEN MADE ABOVE, IN THE LIGHT OF THE SAME, ORDE R OF THE CIT(A) FOR A.Y. 2006-07 IS ALSO CONFIRMED. 5. SINCE THE FACTS ARE IDENTICAL AND THE ISSUES ARE COVERED BY THE ORDER OF I.T.A.T. AGRA BENCH IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR A.YS . 2005-06 AND 2006-07 VIDE ORDER DATED 31.08.2012, TO MAINTAIN CONSISTENCY, WE FOLLOW THE ABOVE ORDER OF I.T.A.T. AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF CIT(A). 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DI SMISSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT) SD/- SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) (A.L. GEHLOT) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PBN/* COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT (APPEALS) CONCERNED 4. CIT CONCERNED 5. D.R., ITAT, AGRA BENCH, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA TRUE COPY