ITO (Exemptions), Chandigarh V. M/s Professional Golf Tour of India, Mohali

ITA 741/CHANDI/2015

• Counselvise Citation: 74121514 RSA 2015
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 14-08-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANOJ MISHRA
• Assessee Lawyers: TEJ MOHAN SINGH
• Keywords: Benefit of exemption
• Section: 11; 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI H.L.KARWA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. RANO JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.741/CHD/2015 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. M/S PROFESIONAL GOLF TOUR OF INDIA WARD CHANDIGARH. # 1180, PHASE-V, MOHALI. PAN: AABTP2044E (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI MANOJ MISHRA, DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI TEJ MOHAN SINGH DATE OF HEARING : 27.10.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17.11.2015 O R D E R PER RANO JAIN, A.M . : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-2, CHANDIGARH DATED 25.2.2015. 2. THERE IS A DELAY OF 92 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEA L. THE DEPARTMENT HAS FILED AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONA TION OF DELAY, IN WHICH IT HAS BEEN EXPLAINED THAT THE T HEN INCUMBENT SMT. KRISHNA KUMARI, ITO, WAS ON LEAVE DU E TO THE SUDDEN DEMISE OF HER HUSBAND AND THE PRESENT INCUMBENT WHO JOINED AS ITO(EXEMPTIONS) ON TRANSFER WAS 2 UNAWARE OF THE PENDING ACTION. ON JOINING OF DUTI ES BY SMT.KRISHNA KUMARI, THE PENDING ACTION WAS NOTICED BY THE PRESENT INCUMBENT. SINCE WE FIND THE REASONS FOR DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL TO BE BONAFIDE AND GENUI NE, WE HEREBY CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL. 3. BRIEFLY, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASS ESSEE HAS SHOWN NET PROFIT OF RS.67,40,805/- AND CLAIMED IT AS BEING EXEMPT UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT , 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). THE ASSESSING OFFICER REFUSED T O GIVE BENEFIT OF SECTION 11 OF THE ACT TO THE ASSESSEE AS THE ASS ESSEE WAS NOT REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT. 4. BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS), IT WAS STATED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BE EN ALLOWED AGAINST THE REFUSAL OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 1 2AA OF THE ACT BY THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE I.T.A.T., CHANDIGAR H BENCH IN ITA NO.551/CHD/2009 DATED 18.4.2013. RELYING ON TH E SAID ORDER OF THE I.T.A.T., CHANDIGARH, THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) TREATED THE ASSESSEE AS REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 1 2AA OF THE ACT AND ALLOWED IT THE BENEFIT OF EXEMPTION UNDER S ECTION 11 OF THE ACT. 5. NOW THE DEPARTMENT HAS COME UP IN APPEAL BEFORE US AGAINST THE SAID ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT (APPEA LS). THE LEARNED D.R. ARGUED THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT POSSESS REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT AT THE T IME OF FINALIZATION OF ASSESSMENT, IT CANNOT BE GIVEN THE EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT. WHILE THE LEARNED CO UNSEL FOR 3 THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT SINCE THE HON'BLE I.T.A .T., CHANDIGARH BENCH HAS ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSE SSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX REFUSING TO GRANT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSEE IS ELIGIBLE TO GET THE EXEMPTION UNDER SEC TION 11 OF THE ACT. A COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL WAS PLACED BEFORE US. FURTHER, IT WAS ALSO STATED THAT FOR T HE SIMILAR REASON, DISALLOWANCE WAS MADE IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 10-11 ALSO, WHICH WAS DELETED BY THE I.T.A.T., CHANDIGARH BENCH. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF BO TH THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE FINDINGS OF THE AUTHORITIE S BELOW AND CONSIDERED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. ON P ERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE I.T.A.T., CHANDIGARH BENCH IN ASSE SSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11, WE OBSERVE THAT I N THAT YEAR ALSO, THE EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE AC T WAS DENIED TO THE ASSESSEE FOR THE REASON THAT THE REGI STRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT WAS REFUSED TO IT AND THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSION ER OF INCOME TAX REFUSING REGISTRATION WAS PENDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. HOWEVER, THE REGISTRATION WAS GRANTED T O THE ASSESSEE FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE I.T.A.T., CHAND IGARH BENCH (SUPRA). IN THE SAID BACKGROUND, THE I.T.A.T., CH ANDIGARH BENCH (SUPRA) HELD AS UNDER : 3. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE D O NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. T HE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN GRANTED REGISTRATION UNDER SECTIO N 12AA OF THE ACT, THEREFORE, INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE HAS TO 4 BE COMPUTED WITH THE AID OF SECTION 11 OF THE ACT. THE LOAN AMOUNT OF RS. 25 LACS COULD NOT BE TREATED AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY FINDIN G GIVEN AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER T REATED THE ENTIRE EXCESS AMOUNT AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE ABSENCE OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF T HE ACT WHICH IS LATER ON GRANTED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE . THUS, THERE IS NO BASIS, WHAT-SO-EVER FOR THE ASSES SING OFFICER TO MAKE ADDITION AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL FAILS AND IS DISMISSED. 7. SINCE THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE EXACTLY THE SAM E AS IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE I.T.A.T., CHANDIGARH BENCH (SUPRA), WE ALSO ALLOW THE EXEMPTION TO THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE A CT. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 17 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2015. SD/- SD/- (H.L.KARWA) (RANO JAIN) VICE PRESIDENT ACOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 17 TH NOVEMBER, 2015 *RATI* COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT(A)/TH E CIT/THE DR. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5