Swami Vivekananda Rural Welfare and Educational Trust, CHENNAI V. ITO, Salem

ITA 954/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 95874 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 03-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 28-04-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P RADHAKRISHNAN
• Assessee Lawyers: A S SRIRAMAN
• Section: 12A

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL S M C BENCH, CHENNAI ... , BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO.954/MDS/2015 ! '#! / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 M/S SWAMI VIVEKANANDA RURAL WELFARE AND EDUCATIONAL TRUST, VEERAGANUR MAIN ROAD, SALEM 636 141 PAN : AAHTS 3628 P V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD II(3), SALEM. (%&/ APPELLANT) ('(%&/ RESPONDENT) %& ) * / APPELLANT BY : SH. A.S. SRIRAMAN, ADVOCATE '(%& ) * / RESPONDENT BY : SH. P. RADHAKRISHNAN, JCIT + ' ) ,- / DATE OF HEARING : 03.07.2015 ./# ) ,- / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07.08.2015 / O R D E R THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), SALEM, DA TED 31.03.2015 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2 I.T.A. NO.954/MDS/15 2. SH. A.S. SRIRAMAN, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESS EE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE-TRUST IS NOT REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. WHILE FILING THE RETURN OF INCOME, THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED REPAYMENT OF LOAN TO THE EXTEN T OF ` 11,56,000/- MADE TO THE TRUSTEES. ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, WHENEVER A TRUSTEE IS IN URGENT NEED OF MONEY, HE U SE TO TAKE LOAN FROM OTHER TRUSTEES AND IT WOULD BE REPAID. REFERR ING TO THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES, THE LD.C OUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT IN THE COMPUTATION, A SUM OF ` 14,00,000/- RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AS LOAN, WAS DISCLOSED TO THE DEPARTMENT A S INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. THEREFORE, ADDITION OF REPAYMENT OF THE SAID LOAN TO THE EXTENT OF ` 11,56,000/- WOULD AMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION. ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, SINCE THE LOAN ITSELF IS TAKEN AS INCOME ON THE DATE IT WAS RECEIVED, THE REPAYMENT C ANNOT BE CONSIDERED FOR COMPUTATION OF TOTAL INCOME. 3. ON THE CONTRARY, SH. P. RADHAKRISHNAN, THE LD. D EPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, SUBMITTED THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE CL AIMS THAT WHAT WAS RECEIVED BY IT IS A LOAN, THEN IT CANNOT BE TRE ATED AS INCOME ON ITS RECEIPT. ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., A LOAN CAN NOT BE AN INCOME. THEREFORE, THE STATEMENT MADE BY THE LD.COUNSEL CAN NOT BE CORRECT. SINCE THE ASSESSEE REPAID AN AMOUNT OF ` 11,56,000/-, ACCORDING TO 3 I.T.A. NO.954/MDS/15 THE LD. D.R., IN THE ABSENCE OF DETAILS, THE ASSESS ING OFFICER MADE THE ADDITION. THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS ALSO RIGHTLY CO NFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ON EITHE R SIDE AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE ONLY DISPUTE IS WITH REGARD TO THE PAYMENT OF ` 11,56,000/- MADE TO THE TRUSTEES. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS THAT IT IS A REPAYMENT MADE TO THE TRUSTEES FOR THE LOAN RECEIVED. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME THAT IT WAS A CONTRIBUTION BY THE TRUSTEES. IF IT IS CONTR IBUTION BY THE TRUSTEES, DEFINITELY IT WILL FORM PART OF TOTAL INC OME OF THE TRUST. ONCE THE CONTRIBUTION IS MADE BY THE TRUSTEES, IT IS NOT KNOWN IN WHAT CAPACITY IT WAS REPAID. AS RIGHTLY SUBMITTED BY TH E LD. D.R., IF IT IS TREATED AS LOAN, THEN IT CANNOT BE TREATED AS INCOM E ON ITS RECEIPT. WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS TREATED IT AS ITS INCOME, THE N IT CANNOT BE A LOAN AT ALL. THEREFORE, UNLESS AND UNTIL THERE WAS AN OBLIGATION FOR REPAYMENT, IT CANNOT BE TREATED AS REPAYMENT OF LOA N. THE NATURE OF RECEIPT OF LOAN AND THE NATURE OF REPAYMENT ARE NOT CLEAR FROM THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOW FILED THE DETAILS WITH REGARD TO RECEIPTS AND REPAYMENTS IN R ESPECT OF THE INDIVIDUAL TRUSTEES. THEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS O F THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TO RECONSIDE R THE MATTER 4 I.T.A. NO.954/MDS/15 AFRESH IN THE LIGHT OF THE DETAILS FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ARE SET ASIDE A ND THE MATTER IS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL RECONSIDER THE ISSUE AFRESH AND BRING ON RECORD THE NATURE OF RECEIPT BY THE ASSESSEE EITHER AS LOAN OR CONTRIBUTION. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL ALSO VERIFY THE NATURE OF R EPAYMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE TRUSTEES ON THE BASIS OF THE MA TERIAL FILED AND THEREAFTER DECIDE THE ISSUE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AFTER GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 7 TH AUGUST, 2015 AT CHENNAI. SD/- ( ... ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 1 /DATED, THE 7 TH AUGUST, 2015. KRI. ) ',23 43#, /COPY TO: %& /APPELLANT / '(%& /RESPONDENT / + 5,() /CIT(A), SALEM / + 5, /CIT, SALEM / 3'6 ', /DR / 7! 8 /GF.