ITO (E), Delhi V. Andhra Pradesh Technology Development & Promotion Centre, New Delhi

ITA 6593/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4339 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 11-12-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ATIQ AHMAD SENIOR
• Keywords: Benefit of exemption
• Section: 143(3); 12AA; 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH F : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.6593/DEL./2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12) ITO (E), VS. ANDHRA PRADESH TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT TRUST WARD 1(1), & PROMOTION CENTRE, DELHI. 23926, INSTITUTIONAL AREA, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI 110 003. (PAN : AAATA5160B) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI ATIQ AHMAD, SENIOR DR DATE OF HEARING : 18.09.2017 DATE OF ORDER : 21.09.2017 O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE APPELLANT, ANDHRA PRADESH TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMEN T & PROMOTION CENTRE (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE A SSESSEE), BY FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL, SOUGHT TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNE D ORDER DATED 11.09.2015 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-40, NEW DELHI QUA THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 ON THE GR OUNDS INTER ALIA THAT :- ITA NO.6593/DEL./2015 2 ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING T HE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY IGNORING THE FACT THAT IT HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO ESTABLISH THAT THE ACTIVITIES W.E. T. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS HAS BEEN FOR THE ALLEVIATION OF POVERTY AND BENEFITTED ANY PARTICULA R CLASS OF POOR PEOPLE THROUGH ANY CONCRETE EVIDENCES. 2. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS NECESSARY FOR ADJUDICAT ION OF THE CONTROVERSY AT HAND ARE : ASSESSEE IS A SOCIETY REG ISTERED UNDER SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT AND ALSO REGISTERED UNDE R SECTION 12AA (1) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE ACT ) VIDE ORDER DATED 23.06.2000, WHICH IS PROMOTED BY GOVERNMENT O F ANDHRA PRADESH, TECHNOLOGY INFORMATION, FORECASTING AND AS SESSMENT COUNCIL AND CONFEDERATION OF INDIAN INDUSTRY. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO INVOLVED IN PROVIDING AND FACILITATING THE SKILL DE VELOPMENT AND TRAINING AT COMMUNITY LEVEL, WASTE LAND DEVELOPMENT WITH SUSTAINABLE LIVELIHOOD BASED ON BAMBOO PLANTATION A ND VALUE ADDED PRODUCTS FOR HOUSING, FOOD, FODDER AND BIO-FUELS IN ORDER TO HELP IN IMPROVING THE UNHEALTHY AND UNHYGIENIC CONDITIONS O F RAG-PACKERS WASTE COLLECTORS AND RE-CYCLERS BY IMPLEMENTING MUN ICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PROJECTS. ASSESSEE IS ALSO PROVID ING BETTER EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES, PROMOTING COTTAGE AND RUR AL INDUSTRIES, PROVIDING HELP IN MARKETING THEIR PRODUCTS AND FOCU S ON HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT AND UPGRADATION. ITA NO.6593/DEL./2015 3 3. ASSESSING OFFICER DENIED BENEFIT OF THE EXEMPTIO N U/S 11(1) OF THE ACT TO THE ASSESSEE AND ASSESSED THE TOTAL I NCOME AT RS.50,43,180/- U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT. 4. ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BY WAY OF FILING APP EAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) WHO HAS ALLOWED THE SAME. FEELING AGGRIEVED, THE REVENUE HAS COME UP BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BY WAY OF C HALLENGING THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT (A). 5. ASSESSEE HAS NOT PREFERRED TO PUT IN APPEARANCE DESPITE ISSUANCE OF THE NOTICE AND CONSEQUENTLY, WE PROCEED ED TO DECIDE THE PRESENT APPEAL WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE LD. D R AS WELL AS ON THE BASIS OF DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE ON THE FILE. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIV E FOR THE REVENUE TO THE APPEAL, GONE THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS R ELIED UPON AND ORDERS PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES BELOW IN T HE LIGHT OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 7. UNDISPUTEDLY, THE ASSESSEE IS INVOLVED IN PROVID ING AND FACILITATING THE SKILL DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING AT COMMUNITY LEVEL, WASTE LAND DEVELOPMENT WITH SUSTAINABLE LIVELIHOOD BASED ON BAMBOO PLANTATION AND VALUE ADDED PRODUCTS FOR HOUS ING FOOD, FODDER AND BIO-FUELS IN ORDER TO HELP IN IMPROVING THE UNHEALTHY AND UNHYGIENIC CONDITIONS OF RAG-PACKERS WASTE COLL ECTORS AND RE- CYCLERS BY IMPLEMENTING MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAG EMENT ITA NO.6593/DEL./2015 4 PROJECTS. ASSESSEE IS ALSO PROVIDING BETTER EMPLOY MENT OPPORTUNITIES, PROMOTING COTTAGE AND RURAL INDUSTRI ES, PROVIDING HELP IN MARKETING THEIR PRODUCTS AND FOCUS ON HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT AND UPGRADATION. IT IS ALSO NOT IN DIS PUTE THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS REGISTERED U/S 12AA (1) OF THE ACT. IT IS ALSO NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS FIRST TIME DENIED THE BENEFIT OF EXEMPTION U/S 11(1) OF THE ACT IN AY 2009-10 ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE IS INVOLVED IN TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSI NESS BUT THE BENEFIT OF EXEMPTION U/S 11 (1) WAS RESTORED BY THE LD. CIT (A) IN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING THAT THE AS SESSEE IS NOT INVOLVED IN ANY TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS OR RATH ER INVOLVED IN PROVIDING HELP TO THE POOR. 8. WHEN THE REVENUE HAS CATEGORICALLY HELD IN AY 20 09-10 VIDE ORDER DATED 17.05.2012 PASSED BY LD. CIT (A) T HAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INVOLVED IN ANY TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS RATHER PROVIDING HELP TO THE POOR AND THERE IS NO CHANGE IN OBJECTS AND ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEES SOCIETY, TAKING DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSI TE VIEW ON THE BASIS OF CONJECTURES AND SURMISES, IS NOT SUSTAINAB LE. 9. MERELY DENYING THE BENEFIT OF EXEMPTION U/S 11(1 ) OF THE ACT BY INVOKING THE PROVISOS OF SECTION 2(15) ON THE GR OUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED FEE FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS ETC. TO THE TUNE OF RS.87,53,561/- IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN VIEW O F THE DECISION ITA NO.6593/DEL./2015 5 RENDERED BY HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN CASE OF INDIA TRADE PROMOTION ORGANISATION VS. DGIT (E) (2015) 53 TAX MANN.COM 404 (DELHI), ALSO RELIED UPON BY THE LD. CIT (A), BECAUSE WHEN OBJECTS AND ACTIVITIES BEING CARRIED OUT BY THE ASS ESSEE SOCIETY ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITS AIMS AND OBJECTS IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THE CHARITABLE GOAL, IT CANNOT BE SAID TO BE INTO ANY T RADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS BY ANY STRETCH OF IMAGINATION. 10. IN VIEW OF WHAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED ABOVE, WE FI ND NO ILLEGALITY OR PERVERSITY IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASS ED BY THE LD. CIT (A), HENCE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS D ISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 21 ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2017. SD/- SD/- (N.K. SAINI) (KULDIP SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED THE 21 ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2017 TS COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT (A)-40, NEW DELHI. 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.