Mantri Ganna Vikas Parisad, Bahraich V. Income Tax Officer-1, Bahraich

ITA 749/LKW/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5636 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-01-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 10-12-2013
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 20-11-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ALOK MITRA
• Assessee Lawyers: S K GUPTA; R S SINGH
• Section: 12A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKN OW BENCH AMC : LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 749 /LKW/201 3 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2010 - 11 MANTRI GANNA VIKAS PARISAD, VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 1, JARWAL ROAD, BAHRAICH. BAHRAICH. PAN:AAALM0925G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : S/SHRI S. K. GUPTA & R. S. SINGH RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ALOK MITRA, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 13 / 12 /2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03/01/2014 ORDER TH IS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) ON A SOLITARY GROUND THAT CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.95,330/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2. THE FACTS, IN BRIEF, BORNE OUT FROM THE RECORD, ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME IN THE STATUS OF AOP SHOWING TOTAL INCOME AT NIL AFTER CLAIMING DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE ACT (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT). THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON A TOTAL INCOME OF RS.2,93,080/ - A FTER DISALLOWING DEDUCTION CLAIMED U/S 80P OF THE ACT. 2 3. THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY, THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THE EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT BY RAISING THE CONTENTIO NS THAT IT IS ENGAGED IN CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES BUT THIS ARGUMENT WAS REJECTED BY CIT(A) HAVING OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT EVEN APPLIED FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT , THEREFORE, CLAIM OF EXEMPTION U/S 11 CANNOT BE ENTERTAINED. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN ANOTHER PLEA OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A) OF THE ACT WITH THE SUBMISSION THAT ASSESSEE WAS HELPING CULTIVATORS OF SUGARCANE IN THE PRODUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF SUGARCANE AND WAS ALSO ADVI SING THE MILL OWNERS AS WELL AS GOVERNMENT REGARDI NG CANE PRODUCTIVITY, QUALITY AND QUANTITY OF PRODUCE, THEREFORE, THE DEDUCTION U/S 80P IS ALSO ALLOWABLE TO THE ASSESSEE. THIS CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO EXAMINED BY THE CIT(A) IN THE LIGHT OF THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80P OF THE ACT. WHILE DENYING THE EXEMPTION, THE CIT(A) HAS OBSERVED THAT THE DEDUCTION U/S 80P CAN ONLY BE ALLOWED TO THE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY. SINCE THE ASSESSEE IS NOT CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY, THE BENEFIT U/S 80P CANNOT BE ALLOWED TO IT. THE CIT(A) ACCORDINGLY DISMISSE D THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. NOW THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND REITERATED ITS CONTENTIONS AS RAISED BEFORE THE CIT(A). BUT DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PLACE ANY EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO SUPPORT ITS CONTENTION THAT IT IS ENTITLED FOR EXEMPTION U/S 11 OR 80P OF THE ACT. I, HOWEVER, HAVE CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND I AM OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT EXEMPTION U/S 11 CAN ONLY BE GRANTED WHE RE THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES AND IS REGISTERED U/S 3 12A OF THE ACT. FOR ALLOWING DEDUCTION U/S 80P, THE ASSESSEE IS REQUIRED TO BE A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY. BUT IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE ASSESSEE IS NEITHER R EGISTERED U/S 12A OF THE ACT NOR IS A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY. THEREFORE, IT IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR ANY EXEMPTION OR DEDUCTION UNDER THE AFORESAID PROVISIONS. THE CIT(A) HAS PROPERLY ADJUDICATED THE ISSUE IN THE LIGHT OF THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. I DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY THEREIN. I ACCORDINGLY CONFIRM HIS ORDER. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03/01/2014) SD/. (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 03/01/2014 *CL SINGH COPY FORWARDED TO THE: 1. APPELLANT. 2. RESPONDENT. 3. CIT (A) 4. CIT 5. DR. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR