M/s Ram Parsad DAV Public School Society, Kurukshetra V. CIT (Exemptions), Chandigarh

ITA 735/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6760 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 27-04-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES B, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 735/CHD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2016-17 M/S RAM PARSAD DAV PUBLIC VS. THE CIT (EXEMPTIONS ), SCHOOL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH SHAHBAD MARKANDA, DISTRICT KURUKSHETRA, PAN NO. AABAR6299Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI AMITOZ SINGH RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 24.07.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11.10.2017 ORDER PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESS EE SOCIETY AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS ) [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS CIT(E)], CHANDIGARH DATED 31.03.20 17 REJECTING THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE FOR GRANT OF APPROVAL U /S 10(23C)(VI) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'). 2. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SU BMITTED THAT ONE OF THE REASON FOR REJECTION OF THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE 2 ASSESSEE HAS APPLIED FOR APPROVAL IN A DIFFERENT NA ME. AS PER THE CERTIFICATE ISSUE BY THE REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES, HA RYANA, THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY MENTIONED THEREIN IS RAM PARSAD D AV PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY, SHAHBAD (M) WHEREAS THE SOCIETY HAS APPLI ED FOR APPROVAL U/S 10(23C)(VI) IN THE NAME OF M/S RAM PARSAD DAV PUBLI C SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL. EVEN THE NAME OF THE SOCIETY AS MENTIONED I N THE OBJECTS / RULES AND REGULATIONS IS RAM PARSAD D.A.V. PUBLIC SCHOOL . THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT APPLICATION FOR A PPROVAL U/S 10(23C)(VI) HAS BEEN APPLIED IN THE WRONG NAME. HE HAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WILL APPLY AFRESH TO THE CIT (E) F OR APPROVAL U/S 10(23C)(VI) IN THE CORRECT NAME. 3. IN VIEW OF THIS, THE PRESENT APPEAL OF THE ASSES SEE SOCIETY IS HEREBY DISMISSED. HOWEVER, IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT IF THE AS SESSEE SOCIETY APPLIES AFRESH IN THE CORRECT NAME OR OTHERWISE TO THE CIT (E), LD. CIT (E) WILL DECIDE THE APPLICATION ON MERITS AFRESH UNINFLUENCE D BY ANY OBSERVATION MADE IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVAT ION, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11.10.2017 SD/- SD/- ( ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 11 TH OCT, 2017 RKK FCOPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR 3