The Income Tax Officer(Exemptions), Jalandhar V. The St. Joseph's Convent School, Jalandhar

ITA 625/ASR/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3333 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (International Taxation) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 07-01-2019
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 29-09-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BHAWANI SHANKAR
• Section: 143(3); 12A; 12AA; 148; 12; 28

Judgement Text

P A G E | 1 ITA NO. 624 & 625/ASR./2017 A.Y(S). 2009-10 & 2010-1 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) VS. ST. JOSEPHS CONVENT SCHOOL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CAMP BENCH AT JALANDHAR BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS. 624 & 625/ASR./2017 (ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2009-10 & 2010-11) THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), WARD, JALANDHAR VS. ST. JOSEPHS CONVENT SCHOOL, PHAGWARA, H.O. BISHOP HOUSE, CIVIL LINES, JALANDHAR. PAN AACTS9035M (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI BHAWANI SHANKAR, D.R. RESPONDENT BY: SHRI GUNJEET SINGH SYAL, A.R DATE OF HEARING: 07.01.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 11 .03.2019 O R D E R PER RAVISH SOOD, JM THE PRESENT APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE FOR A.Y(S) . 2009- 10 & 2010-11 ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE CIT(A)-2, JALANDHAR, DATED 06.07.2017 AND 05.07.2017, RESPECT IVELY, WHICH IN TURN ARISES FROM THE RESPECTIVE ORDERS PASSED BY TH E A.O UNDER SEC. 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT IT ACT), BOTH DATED 19.12.2016. AS COMMON ISSUES ARE INVOLVED IN THE AFOREMENTIONED APPEALS, THEREFORE, THE SAME ARE BEI NG TAKEN UP AND DISPOSED OFF BY WAY OF A CONSOLIDATED ORDER. WE SHA LL TAKE UP THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR A.Y. 2009-10 AS THE LEAD MATTER, AND THE P A G E | 2 ITA NO. 624 & 625/ASR./2017 A.Y(S). 2009-10 & 2010-1 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) VS. ST. JOSEPHS CONVENT SCHOOL ADJUDICATION OF THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE SAID APP EAL WOULD BE APPLICABLE MUTATIS MUTANDIS FOR DISPOSAL OF THE APP EAL OF THE REVENUE FOR A.Y. 2009-10. THE REVENUE ASSAILING THE ORDER O F THE CIT(A) IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR A.Y. 2009-10 HAS RAISED BE FORE US THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: I. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN HOLDING THAT THE PAYMENT TO THE TUNE OF RS.80,00,000/- TO DIOCESE OF JALANDHAR AMOUNTS TO UTILIZATION AS THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN MADE OUT OF ACCUMULA TED FUND AND THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN UTILIZED FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSE IN VIEW OF THE DOMINANT REL IGIOUS OBJECTS OF THE DIOCESE OF JALANDHAR. II. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION U/S. 11 FOR THE YEAR EVEN WHEN THE CASE WAS RE-OPENED IN MARCH 2014 BY TREATING THE AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 12A(2) INTRODUCED BY FINANCE (NO.2) ACT, 2014 W.E.F 01.10.2014 BY WAY OF INSERTI ON OF PROVISO, AS RETROSPECTIVE IN OPERATION. III. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, T HE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN NOT CONSIDERING THE HONBLE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURTS D ECISION RENDERED IN CWP NO. 20972/2011, 10691/2014 AGAINST THE CANCELLATION OF AP PROVAL U/S 10(23C)(VI) IN WHICH THE COURTS RIGHTLY UPHELD THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE CCIT, LUD HIANA THAT ACTIVITIES OF ASSESSEE WERE DOUBTFUL AS ITS INCOME WAS NOT APPLIED FOR ITS OBJECTS AND THERE WAS DIVERSION OF FUNDS TO THE DIOCESE OF JALANDHAR AND UNDER SEC. 10(23C)(VI) OF THE A CT. IV. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN IGNORING THAT THE INSTITUTION HAS TO EXIST SOLELY FOR EDUCATIONAL P URPOSE AND EXEMPTION IS NOT TO BE GRANTED IF THE TRUST DOES NOT EXIST SOLELY FOR EDUCATIONA L PURPOSES AND DIVERTS ITS INCOME TO ANOTHER TRUST WHOSE OBJECTS ARE NOT SOLELY FOR EDUCATIONAL P URPOSES. V. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE L D. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ON THE SAME ISSUE FOR A.Y. 2007-08, 2008-09, 2011-12 & 2012-13 ARE PENDING BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH CO URT FOR ADJUDICATION. VI. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES TO LEAVE, ADD OR AMEND THE GROU NDS OF APPEAL ON OR BEFORE THE APPEAL HEARD AND DISPOSED OFF. IN SO FAR THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) FOR A.Y. 2010-11 IS CONCERNED, THE REVENUE HAS ASSAILED THE SAME ON THE FOLLOWING GROU NDS OF APPEAL:- I. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN HOLDING THAT THE PAYMENT TO THE TUNE OF RS.80,00,000/- TO DIOCESE OF JALANDHAR AMOUNTS TO UTILIZATION AS THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN MADE OUT OF ACCUMULA TED FUND AND THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN UTILIZED FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSE IN VIEW OF THE DOMINANT REL IGIOUS OBJECTS OF THE DIOCESE OF JALANDHAR. II. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION U/S. 11 FOR THE YEAR EVEN WHEN THE CASE WAS RE-OPENED IN MARCH 2014 BY TREATING THE AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 12A(2) INTRODUCED BY FINANCE (NO.2) ACT, 2014 W.E.F 01.10.2014 BY WAY OF INSERTI ON OF PROVISO, AS RETROSPECTIVE IN OPERATION. III. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, T HE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN NOT CONSIDERING THE HONBLE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURTS D ECISION RENDERED IN CWP NO. 20972/2011, 10691/2014 AGAINST THE CANCELLATION OF AP PROVAL U/S 10(23C)(VI) IN WHICH THE COURTS RIGHTLY UPHELD THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE CCIT, LUD HIANA THAT ACTIVITIES OF ASSESSEE WERE P A G E | 3 ITA NO. 624 & 625/ASR./2017 A.Y(S). 2009-10 & 2010-1 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) VS. ST. JOSEPHS CONVENT SCHOOL DOUBTFUL AS ITS INCOME WAS NOT APPLIED FOR ITS OBJECTS AND THERE WAS DIVERSION OF FUNDS TO THE DIOCESE OF JALANDHAR AND UNDER SEC. 10(23C)(VI) OF THE A CT. IV. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS, TH E LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN IGNORING THAT THE INSTITUTION HAS TO EXIST SOLELY FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSE AND EXEMPTIONM IS NOT TO BE GRANTED IF THE TRUST DOES NOT EXIST SOLELY FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES AN D DIVERTS ITS INCOME TO ANOTHER TRUST WHOSE OBJECTS ARE NOT SOLELY FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. V. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE L D. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ON THE SAME ISSUE FOR A.Y. 2007-08, 2008-09, 2011-12 & 2012-13 ARE PENDING BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH CO URT FOR ADJUDICATION. VI. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES TO LEAVE, ADD OR AMEND THE GROU NDS OF APPEAL ON OR BEFORE THE APPEAL HEARD AND DISPOSED OFF. 2. BRIEFLY STATED, THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WHICH IS RUNNI NG A SCHOOL AND IS REGISTERED WITH THE REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES U NDER THE SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, (XXI OF 1860), AS AMENDED BY PUNJ AB AMENDMENT ACT, 1957, VIDE ORDER NO. 724 OF 1991-92, DATED 13. 03.1992, HAD FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y. 2009-10 ON 30.09.2009 , DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS. NIL. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS REO PENED UNDER SEC. 147 OF THE IT ACT. AS THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO FILE A RETURN OF INCOME IN COMPLIANCE TO THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SEC. 148 OF T HE IT ACT, THEREFORE, ITS ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME FILED ON 3 0.09.2009 WAS TREATED AS THAT FILED IN RESPONSE TO THE AFOREMENTIONED NOT ICE. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED FOR COMPULSOR Y SCRUTINY AND NOTICES UNDER SEC. 143(2)/142(1) WERE ISSUED BY THE A.O. 3. DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE A.O THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY HAD RECEIPTS O F RS. 1,85,13,625/- WHICH WERE CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN UTILIZED FOR ITS OB JECTS. IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE A.O THAT THE TOTAL EXPENDITURE OF R S. 1,85,13,625/- INCLUDED AN AMOUNT OF RS. 65,25,000/- THAT WAS PAID BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY UNDER THE HEAD EDUCATIONAL EXTENSION SERVI CE TO M/S DIOCESE OF JALANDHAR. THE A.O OBSERVED THAT THAT TH OUGH THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY HAD RAISED A CLAIM UNDER SEC. 10(23C)(VI) O F THE IT ACT, BUT AS THE EXEMPTION GRANTED UNDER THE SAID STATUTORY PROV ISION WAS WITHDRAWN W.E.F. A.Y. 2006-07 AND ONWARDS BY THE PR ESCRIBED P A G E | 4 ITA NO. 624 & 625/ASR./2017 A.Y(S). 2009-10 & 2010-1 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) VS. ST. JOSEPHS CONVENT SCHOOL AUTHORITY I.E. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LU DHIANA, VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 13.02.2012, HENCE THE SAME COULD NOT BE ALLOWED. THE A.O WAS OF THE VIEW THAT AS THE OBJECTS OF M/S DIOC ESE OF JALANDHAR WERE NOT EDUCATIONAL, BUT WERE RELIGIOUS IN NATURE, THEREFORE, THE PAYMENTS MADE TO IT BY THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT BE TR EATED AS AN APPLICATION OF INCOME FOR ATTAINMENT OF THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY. IN THE BACKDROP OF HIS AFORESAID OBSERVATI ONS THE A.O WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE PAYMENTS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE TO M/S DIOCESE OF JALANDHAR COULD NOT BE HELD TO HAVE BEEN TRANSFERRE D TO A SOCIETY HAVING SIMILAR OBJECTIVES. IN SUM AND SUBSTANCE, IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE A.O THAT THE PAYMENTS BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY T O M/S DIOCESE OF JALANDHAR COULD NOT BE HELD TO HAVE BEEN MADE SOLEL Y FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. ON THE BASIS OF HIS AFORESAID OBSERVATION S THE A.O BEING OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WAS NOT ENTITLED FOR EXEMPTION UNDER SEC. 10(23C)(VI), ADDED THE AMOUNT OF RS. 65, 25,000/- THAT WAS PAID TO M/S DIOCESE OF JALANDHAR TO THE TAXABLE INC OME OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. THE ASSESSEE IN THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PRO CEEDINGS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE A.O THAT IT WAS GRANTED REGIST RATION UNDER SEC. 12AA W.E.F. 25.02.2013. IT WAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE A.O THAT ON IDENTICAL LINES THE CASES OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE E ARLIER YEARS I.E. A.Y(S). 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2012-13 WERE REOPENED A ND THE ASSESSMENTS WERE MADE AFTER DENYING EXEMPTION UNDER SEC. 10(23C). IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE BEING AGGRIEVED HAD CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL FOR THE SAID RESPECTIVE YEARS BEFO RE THE TRIBUNAL, WHICH HAD VIDE ITS ORDERS PASSED IN ITA NO(S). 19,2 0,21 & 22/ASR/2016, VIDE A CONSOLIDATED ORDER DATED 26.09. 2016 ALLOWED THE APPEALS AND HAD CONCLUDED VIZ. (I) THAT THE SUBSEQU ENT GRANT OF REGISTRATION OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY UNDER SEC. 12A A W.E.F. 25.02.2013 P A G E | 5 ITA NO. 624 & 625/ASR./2017 A.Y(S). 2009-10 & 2010-1 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) VS. ST. JOSEPHS CONVENT SCHOOL WOULD OPERATE RETROSPECTIVELY FOR ALL THE YEARS UND ER CONSIDERATION; AND (II) THE PAYMENT OF EDUCATION EXTENSION SERVICE S TO M/S DIOCESE OF JALANDHAR WAS AN APPLICATION OF INCOME, DULY SATISF YING THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 11(1)(A) AND SEC. 11(3)(D) OF THE IT ACT. I N THE BACKDROP OF THE AFORESAID FACTS, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE T HAT EXEMPTION UNDER SEC. 11 AND 12 OF THE IT ACT BE ALLOWED, AND THE PAYMENT OF EDUCATION EXTENSION SERVICES TO M/S DIOCESE OF JALA NDHAR BE TREATED AS AN APPLICATION OF INCOME. HOWEVER, THE A.O DECLI NED TO ACCEPT THE AFORESAID CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE A.O WAS OF THE VIEW THAT AS THE REGISTRATION UNDER SEC. 12AA WAS GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY W.E.F. 01.04.2012 THAT WAS RELEVANT TO A.Y. 2013-14 , THUS FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THE ASSESSEE WAS NEITHER APPROV ED UNDER SEC. 10(23C)(VI) NOR REGISTERED UNDER SEC. 12AA OF THE I T ACT. IN THE BACKDROP OF HIS AFORESAID CONVICTION THE A.O BEING OF THE VIEW THAT THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERA TION WAS LIABLE TO BE ASSESSED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 28 TO 44 O F THE IT ACT, ASSESSED ITS INCOME AT RS. 65,25,000/-. 5. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN AP PEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE RAISED TWO FOLD CONTENTIONS BE FORE THE CIT(A) VIZ. (I) THAT BY VIRTUE OF THE AMENDMENT MADE BY THE FIN ANCE ACT 2014, THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 12A(2) WERE RETROSPECTIVELY APPL ICABLE; AND (II) THAT THE PAYMENTS MADE FOR EDUCATION EXTENSION SERVICES TO M/S DIOCESE OF JALANDHAR WAS AN APPLICATION OF INCOME OF THE ASSES SEE SOCIETY. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT BOTH THE ISSUES HAD BEEN DECIDED BY THE ITAT, AMRITSAR IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE WHILE DISPOSING OFF ITS APPEALS FOR A.Y(S) 2007-08, 2008-09, 2011-12 & 2012 -13, VIDE ITS ORDER PASSED IN ITA NO(S). 19 TO 22/ASR/2016, DATED 26.09.2016. THE CIT(A) AFTER DELIBERATING AT LENGTH ON THE ISSUES U NDER CONSIDERATION WAS PERSUADED TO SUBSCRIBE TO THE CLAIM OF THE ASSE SSEE THAT THE P A G E | 6 ITA NO. 624 & 625/ASR./2017 A.Y(S). 2009-10 & 2010-1 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) VS. ST. JOSEPHS CONVENT SCHOOL RESPECTIVE ISSUES WERE DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASS ESSEE BY THE TRIBUNAL WHILE DISPOSING OF ITS APPEALS FOR THE AFO REMENTIONED PRECEDING YEARS. ON THE BASIS OF HIS AFORESAID OBSE RVATIONS THE CIT(A) DIRECTED THE A.O TO ALLOW THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR EXEMPTION OF INCOME AND ALSO TO TREAT THE PAYMENT OF RS. 65,25,0 00/- MADE TO M/S DIOCESE OF JALANDHAR AS AN APPLICATION OF INCOME. 6. THE REVENUE BEING AGGRIEVED WITH THE ORDER OF T HE CIT(A) HAS CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE US. THE LD. DEP ARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (FOR SHORT D.R) RELIED ON THE ORDER PASSED BY THE A.O. 7. PER CONTRA, THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE (F OR SHORT A.R) FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE THAT THE REGI STRATION GRANTED UNDER SEC. 12A OF THE IT ACT BY THE CIT, VIDE HIS O RDER DATED 25.02.2013 WOULD BE APPLICABLE RETROSPECTIVELY BY V IRTUE OF AMENDMENT MADE BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2014, WAS SQUARE LY COVERED BY THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL PASSED WHILE DISPOSING OF F ITS APPEALS FOR A.Y(S) 2007-08, 2008-09, 2011-12 & 2012-13, VIDE IT S ORDER PASSED IN ITA NO(S). 19 TO 22/ASR/2016, DATED 26.09.2016. THE LD. A.R IN ORDER TO FORTIFY HIS AFORESAID CLAIM DREW OUR ATTENTION T O PARA 9-10 AND PARA 28 OF THE AFOREMENTIONED CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF THE TR IBUNAL, WHEREIN IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE FIRST PROVISO TO SEC. 12A(2) OF THE IT ACT WAS APPLICABLE RETROSPECTIVELY. IN SO FAR THE PAYMENT O F RS. 65,25,000/- BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY TO M/S DIOCESE OF JALANDHAR WA S CONCERNED, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. A.R THAT THE SAME WAS HELD BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ITS ORDER FOR THE AFOREMENTIONED PRECEDING YEARS AS APPLICATION OF INCOME BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY. IN ORDER TO BUTTRES S HIS AFORESAID CONTENTION THE LD. A.R TOOK US THROUGH PARA 32-38 OF THE AFORESAID ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, WHEREIN IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE PAYMENT OF EDUCATION EXTENSION SERVICES TO M/S DIOCESE OF JALA NDHAR WAS TO BE ALLOWED AS APPLICATION OF INCOME. IN SUM AND SUBSTA NCE, IT WAS P A G E | 7 ITA NO. 624 & 625/ASR./2017 A.Y(S). 2009-10 & 2010-1 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) VS. ST. JOSEPHS CONVENT SCHOOL AVERRED BY THE LD. A.R THAT BOTH THE ISSUES THAT HA D BEEN ASSAILED BY THE REVENUE WERE SQUARELY COVERED BY THE ORDER OF T HE TRIBUNAL FOR THE AFOREMENTIONED PRECEDING YEARS. 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES FOR BOTH THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIE S AND THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE CIT(A) AFTER DELIBERATING AT LENGTH ON THE ISSUES UNDER CONSIDERATION HAD OBSERVED THAT THE SAME WERE SQUARELY COVERED BY THE AFOREMENTIONED ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL PASSED WHILE DISPOSING OFF THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE PRECEDING YEARS VIZ. A.Y(S) 2007-08, 2008-09, 2011-12 & 2012-13, VI DE ITS ORDER PASSED IN ITA NO(S). 19 TO 22/ASR/2016, DATED 26.09 .2016, BY OBSERVING AS UNDER :- 4.3 I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE AO AND SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE AR OF THE APPELLANT IN THIS REGARD INCLUDING T HE JUDICIAL CITATIONS GIVEN THEREIN AND FIND THAT THERE ARE TWO ISSUES INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL : (I) THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION OF INCOME MADE BY THE APPELLANT ON THE GROUND THAT REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE IT ACT WAS GRANTED BY THE CIT VIDE ORDER DATED 25.02.2013 AND BY VIRTUE OF THE AMENDMENTS MADE BY THE FINANCE ACT 2014, THE PROV ISIONS OF SECTION 12A(2) ARE APPLICABLE RETROSPECTIVELY. (II) THE PAYMENTS MADE FOR EDUCATIONAL EXTENSION SERVICES TO THE DIOCESE OF JALANDHAR IS AN APPLICATION OF INCOME OR NOT. 4.4 THE AO HAS DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION OF INC OME PRIMARILY ON THE GROUND THAT APPROVAL U/S 10(23C)(VI) OF THE ACT HAS BEEN WITH DRAWN BY THE CCIT VIDE ORDER DATED 13.02.2012. IT IS ALSO STATED BY THE AO THAT PROVISIONS OF SECTION 12A ARE PROSPECTIVE IN NATURE AND THEREFORE, THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION OF INCOME WAS DENIED. FURTHER, AO HAS HELD THAT PAYMENTS MADE BY THE APPELLANT OF RS. 66,25,000/ - TO DIOCESE OF JALANDHAR IS NOT FOR THE PURPOSES OF EDUCATION AND CANNOT BE TREATED AS AN AP PLICATION OF INCOME. 4.5 THE APPELLANT HAS SUBMITTED THAT BOTH THE ISSUE HA VE BEEN DECIDED BY THE HONBLE ITAT AMRITSAR BENCH IN THE CASE OF APPELLANT VIDE ORDER DATED 26.09.2016, WHICH WAS BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE AO ALSO IN THE CASE OF THE A SSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BUT CONTRARY VIEW TAKEN BY THE AO ON THE GROUND THAT APPEAL IS PENDI NG AGAINST THE CANCELATION OF REGISTRATION U/S 10(23C)(VI) OF THE ACT IN THE CASE O F THE APPELLANT. P A G E | 8 ITA NO. 624 & 625/ASR./2017 A.Y(S). 2009-10 & 2010-1 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) VS. ST. JOSEPHS CONVENT SCHOOL 4.6. HAVING CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE IN THIS REGARD , I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HONBLE ITAT AMRITSAR BENCH IN THE CAS E OF THE APPELLANT IN ITA NO. 19 TO 22/ASR/2016 FOR A.Y. 2007-08, 2008-09, 2011-12 AND 2012-13 VIDE ORDER DATED 26.09.2016 AND FIND THAT BOTH THE ABOVE MENTIONED ISSUED HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED IN DETAIL IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL. BOTH THESE ISSUES HAVE BEE N DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT IN THE SAID ORDER. RESPECTFULLY, FOLLOWING THE SAM E ORDER, I DIRECT THE AO TO ALLOW THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT FOR EXEMPTION OF INCOME AND A LSO TO TREAT THE PAYMENTS OF RS. 66,25,000/- MADE TO DIOCESE OF JALANDHAR AS AN APPLICA TION OF INCOME. WE HAVE PERUSED THE AFORESAID OBSERVATIONS OF THE C IT(A), AND ARE PERSUADED TO SUBSCRIBE TO THE VIEW TAKEN BY HIM THA T BOTH THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL ARE SQUARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL PASSED WHILE DISPOSING OFF THE APPEALS IN THE ASSESSES OWN CASE FOR THE PRECEDING YEARS VIZ. A.Y(S) 2007-08, 2008-09, 2011-12 & 2012-13, VIDE ITS ORDER PASSED IN ITA NO(S). 19 TO 22/ASR/2016, DATED 26.09.2016. THE LD. D.R HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO REBUT THE CONTENTION ADVANCED BY THE L D. A.R THAT THE ISSUES UNDER CONSIDERATION WERE SQUARELY COVERED BY THE AFORESAID ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSES OWN CASE FOR THE AFOREMENTIONED PRECEDING YEARS. WE THUS IN TERMS OF OUR AFORESAID OBSERVATIONS, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE TRIBUN AL IN THE ASSESSES OWN CASE FOR THE AFOREMENTIONED PRECEDING YEARS, UP HOLD THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 9. THAT BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE I.E. ITA NO . 624/ASR/2017 (A.Y. 2009-10) AND ITA NO. 625/ASR/2017 (A.Y. 2010- 11) ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON11/03/2019 SD/- SD/- ( N.K. SAINI) (RAVISH SOOD) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL ME MBER PLACE : CHANDIGARH; DATED 11.03.2019 PS. ROHIT