ITO (E), New Delhi V. Centre for Development of Telematics, New Delhi

ITA 6057/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7162 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 14-09-2016
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 07-11-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Retrospective amendment
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH B NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA : ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE : JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 6057/DEL/2013 U/S 2006-07 INCOME TAX OFFICER (E) VS. CENTRE FOR DEVELOPMENT O F TELEMATICS, TRUST WARD-III, C-DOT CAMPUS, MEHRAULI, NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. PAN: AAATC 3895 K (APPELLANT) ( RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI ANIL KUMAR SAROHA SR. DR RESPONDENT : SHRI AJAY VOHRA SR. ADV. & SHRI ADITYA VOHRA ADV. DATE OF HEARING : 14/09/2016. DATE OF ORDER : 19/09/2016. O R D E R PER S.V. MEHROTRA, A.M: THIS IS DEPARTMENTS APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 22.08.2013 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS)-XXI, NEW DELHI IN APPEAL NO. 01/20 11-12/337 RELATING TO AY 2006-07. 2. AT THE OUTSET LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE POINT ED OUT THAT THE DEPARTMENTS APPEAL HAS BECOME INFRUCTUOUS AND DESERVES TO BE DI SMISSED. HE POINTED OUT THAT IN THIS CASE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED EXEMPTION U/S 10(21) . HOWEVER, THE AO VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 31.12.2008 DENIED THE SAME OBSERVING TH AT SINCE CBDT VIDE 2 NOTIFICATION NO. 148/2007 DATED 12.4.2007 HAD NOTIF IED THE ASSESSEE TO BE IN THE CATEGORY OF OTHER INSTITUTIONS PARTLY ENGAGED IN RESEARCH ACTIVITIES U/S 35(1)(II) OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR BENEF IT U/S 10(21). 3. LD. COUNSEL POINTED OUT THAT CIT(A) VIDE HIS ORD ER DATED 28.1.2011 UPHELD THE FINDING OF THE AO CATEGORIZING IT UNDER OTHER INSTITUTIONS PARTLY ENGAGED IN RESEARCH ACTIVITIES AND, THEREFORE, NOT ELIGIBLE F OR BENEFIT U/S 10(21). HE POINTED OUT THAT AO PASSED CONSEQUENTIAL ORDER ON 17.3.2011 GIVING EFFECT TO THE DIRECTIONS CONTAINED IN CIT(A)S ORDER DATED 28.1.2011. LD. CO UNSEL FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ON 19.3.2013 THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT PASSED ORDER SETTING ASIDE CBDT NOTIFICATION NO. 148/2007 AND DIRECTED THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT TO DECIDE THE ISSUE WHETHER THE ASSESSEE WAS A SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH ASS OCIATION OR OTHER INSTITUTIONS PARTLY DOING SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH WITHIN THREE MON THS FROM THE DATE OF ORDER. HE FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT ON 13.8.2013 CBDT VIDE NOT IFICATION NO. 62 OF 2013 NOTIFIED THE ASSESSEE TO BE COVERED IN THE CATEGORY OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH ASSOCIATION WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT FROM 1.4.200 2 ONWARDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 35(1)(II) OF THE ACT. 4. LD. COUNSEL POINTED OUT THAT THE ITAT VIDE ITS O RDER DATED 27.6.2014 IN APPEAL AGAINST CIT(A)S ORDER DATED 28.1.2011 SET A SIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND AO AND RESTORED THE ISSUE AFRESH TO THE AO WITH DIR ECTION TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER NOTING AS UNDER: 3 - IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER (L' ROUND) WAS PASSED IN REFERENCE TO CBDT NOTIFICATION NO. 148/2007 DATED 12.04.2007 - AFORESAID NOTIFICATION WAS SUBSEQUENTLY SET ASIDE B Y THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI VIDE JUDGMENT RENDERED ON 19.03.2013 - CBDT ISSUED FRESH NOTIFICATION NO.62 OF2013 DATED 13.08.2013 NOTIFYING THE ASSESSEE TO BE COVERED IN THE CATEGORY OF 'SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH ASSOCIATION', WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT FROM 0 1.04.2002 ONWARDS, FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 35(L)(II) OF THE ACT - EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 10(21) HAS BEEN GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ITSELF IN ASSESS MENT ORDER PASSED FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. 5. LD. COUNSEL POINTED OUT THAT IN THE BACKDROP OF THESE PROCEEDINGS, THE LD. CIT(A)S ORDER DATED 22.8.2013 ALLOWING ASSESSEES APPEAL AGAINST APPEAL EFFECT ORDER DATED 17.3.2011 PASSED BY THE AO U/S 143(3) R EAD WITH SECTION 250 OF THE ACT ON THE GROUND THAT CBDT VIDE NOTIFICATION NO. 6 2 OF 2013 DATED 13.8.2013 NOTIFIED THE ASSESSEE AS A SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH ASSO CIATION AND THE ASSESSEE WAS, THEREFORE, ENTITLED TO THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION U/S 1 0(21) OF THE ACT, DOES NOT SURVIVE IN VIEW OF THE TRIBUNALS ORDER. HE, THEREFORE, SUB MITTED THAT THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY REVENUE, IN ANY VIEW OF THE MATTER, HAS BE COME INFRUCTUOUS. 6. LD. DR DID NOT DISPUTE ALL THE FACTS MENTIONED B Y LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 4 7. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE P ARTIES AND FIND THAT THE DENIAL FOR EXEMPTION U/S 10(21) WAS MADE BECAUSE CB DT HAD NOTIFIED VIDE NOTIFICATION NO. 148 OF 2007 DATED 12.4.2007 TO THE ASSESSEE AS IN THE CATEGORY OF OTHER INSTITUTIONS PARTLY ENGAGED IN RESEARCH ACT IVITIES. HOWEVER, AFTER THE DECISION OF HONBLE HIGH COURT VIDE NOTIFICATION NO . 62 OF 2013 DATED 13.8.2013 ISSUED BY CBDT, THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN CATEGORIZED A S SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH ASSOCIATION WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT FROM 1.4.200 2.FURTHER, WE NOTE THAT VIDE ORDER DATED 27.6.2014 TRIBUNAL HAS SET ASIDE LD. CI T(A)S ORDER IN FIRST ROUND OF PROCEEDINGS AND, THEREFORE, THE PRESENT IMPUGNED OR DER OF LD. CIT(A) IN SECOND ROUND OF PROCEEDINGS DOES NOT SURVIVE AND, THEREFOR E, THE DEPARTMENTS APPEAL IS DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. 8. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCEMENT IN OPEN COURT ON 19/09/2016. SD/- SD/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (S.V. MEHROTRA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 19/09/2016. *MP* COPY OF ORDER TO: 1. ASSESSEE 2. AO 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, NEW DELHI.