DCIT, Lucknow V. Luckow Development Authority, Lucknow

ITA 664/LKW/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 66423714 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-04-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 31-01-2014
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 08-11-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Benefit of exemption
• Section: 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKN BENCH A : LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. K. GARODIA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 664 /LKW/201 1 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2008 - 2009 DY.C.I.T., VS. LUCKNOW DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY RANGE - 1, NAVEEN BHAWAN, VIPIN KHAND, LUCKNOW. GOMTI NAGAR, LUCKNOW. PAN:AAALL0016F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) C.O. NO.17/LKW/2012 (IN I.T.A. NO. 664 /LKW/201 2) ASSESSMENT YEAR :2008 - 2009 LUCKNOW DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, VS. DY. C.I.T., RANGE - 1, GOMTI NAGAR, LUCKNOW. LUCKNOW. (OBJECTOR) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SHRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, CIT, D.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI RAKESH GARG, ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING : 31 / 01 /201 4 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11/04/2014 ORDER PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV: TH IS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) , INTER ALIA, ON VARIOUS GROUNDS, WHICH ARE AS UNDER: 1. WHETHER THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DIRECTING THE A.O. TO ALLOW THE EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE I.T. ACT, WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT IT IS NOT ALLOWABLE AS PER LAW? 2 2. WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITIONS OF RS.51,74,89,632/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF 'MONEY TRANSFERRED IN INFRASTRUCTURE FUND AND NOT CREDITED IN I & E ACCOUNT', ALTHOUGH THEY ARE CLEARLY THE TRAD ING RECEIPTS OF THE ASSESSEE? 3. WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITIONS OF RS.29,46,776/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OUT OF PENSION FUND AND STAFF WELFARE FUND EVEN THOUGH THE ASSESSEE'S AUDITOR HIMSELF HAS SUBMI TTED THAT THEY ARE NOT ALLOWABLE? 4. WHETHER THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITIONS OF RS.88,303 / - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OUT OF EMPLOYEES' CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS P.P. AND G.I.S. WHICH WERE MADE BEYOND THE DUE DATE AND ARE DISALLOWABLE AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 36 1(1 )(VA) OF THE I. T. ACT? 5. APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVES TO ADD OR AMEND ANY ONE OR MORE OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, AS STATED ABOVE AS AND WHEN NEED OF DOING SO ARISES WITH THE PRIOR PERMISSION OF THE H ON'BLE BENCH. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED THE CROSS OBJECTION DISPUTING THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 3 . ON A CAREFUL PERUSAL OF THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND THE OTHER MATERIAL FOUND ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DENIED THE BENEFIT OF EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT HAVING OBSERVED THAT THE ACTIVITIES RUN BY THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE TERMED AS CHARITABLE IN NATURE . HE ACCORDINGLY COMPUTED THE INCOME BY APPLYING THE NORMAL PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. AGAINST THE DENIAL OF THE EXEMPTION, THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND PLACE4D RELIANCE UPON THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 06, 2006 - 07 AND 2007 - 08 IN WHICH FOR THE SAME REASONS THE ASSESSEE WAS HELD TO BE 3 NOT ENGAGED IN CHAR ITABLE ACTIVITIES. THE LEARNED CIT(A) RELYING UPON THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL FOR THE EARLIER YEARS FROM 2005 - 06 TO 2007 - 08 IN WHICH THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) HOLDING THAT ASSESSEE WAS ENGAGED IN CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES, WERE APPROVED, HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE I S ENTITLED FOR EXEMPTION U/S 11 AND DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RE - EXAMINE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE LIGHT OF THE OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND GRANT EXEMPTION AS PER LAW. 4 . AGGRIEVED, THE REVENUE HAS PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNA L WITH THE SUBMISSIONS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ENGAGED IN CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES. BUT IN SUPPORT THEREOF NO CONCRETE EVIDENCE IS PLACED ON RECORD. 5 . THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, ON THE OTHER HAND, HAS CONTENDED THAT WHILE HOLDING THAT THE ASS ESSEE IS ENGAGED IN CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES, THE CIT(A) HAS FOLLOWED THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS IN WHICH SIMILAR ACTIVITIES WERE QUESTIONED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. SINCE THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE ASSE SSING OFFICER FOR GRANT OF EXEMPTION IN THE LIGHT OF OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE ACT, THERE IS NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF CIT(A). 6 . HAVING CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES, WE FIND THAT CIT(A) HAS ADJUDICATED THE ISSUE IN THE LIGHT OF THE ORDER S OF THE TRIBUNAL FOR IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING YEAR IN WHICH THE TRIBUNAL HAS CONFIRMED THE VIEW OF THE CIT(A) HOLDING THE ACTIVITIES CARRIED ON BY THE ASSESSEE AS CHARITABLE IN NATURE AND , THEREFORE, ENTITLED FOR EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT. SINCE THE MATTER HAS BEEN RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH THE DIRECTION TO RE - EXAMINE THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION IN THE LIGHT OF THE OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE ACT, WE FIND NO INFIRMITY THEREIN. 4 ACCORDINGLY, WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF CIT(A). SO FAR AS THE OTHER ISSUES ARE CONCERNED, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT SINCE THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RE - EXAMINE THE CLAIM IN THE LIGHT OF THE FINDINGS THAT THE ACTIVITIES CARRIED ON BY THE ASSESSEE ARE OF CHARITABLE IN NATURE, NO ADJUDICATIO N OF THE SAME IS CALLED FOR AT THIS STAGE. ACCORDINGLY, WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF CIT(A). 7 . SO FAR AS THE CROSS OBJECTION IS CONCERNED, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT SINCE THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RE - EXAMINE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE U /S 11 OF THE ACT, WE FIND NO MERIT IN THE CROSS OBJECTION AND ACCORDINGLY WE DISMISS THE SAME. 8 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AND CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11/04/2014 ) SD/. SD/. (A. K. GARODIA) (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 11/04/2014 *CL SINGH COPY FORWARDED TO THE: 1. APPELLANT. 2. RESPONDENT. 3. CIT (A) 4. CIT 5. DR. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR