M/s Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Una V. ITO, Una

ITA 974/CHANDI/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8503 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-08-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 30-08-2010
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 30-06-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAI SHREE SHARMA
• Section: 234B

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES (A) BEFORE SHRI G.S.PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS.SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA 971 TO 976/CHD/2010 A.Y. : 2003-04 TO 2008-09 M/S AGRICULTURE PRODUCE V I.T.O., MARKET COMMITTEE, UNA (HP). UNA (H.P.) PAN : AAALM-0605-P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY: SMT. JAISHREE SHARMA ORDER PER G.S.PANNU, AM THESE SIX APPEALS ARE PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AG AINST TWO ORDERS OF THE CIT(APPEALS) DATED 05.04.2010 AND 11.01.2010 WHICH PERTAIN TO THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04, 2004 -05 AND 2005-06 TO 2008-09 RESPECTIVELY. 2. IN ALL THE SIX APPEALS, THE ONLY ISSUE AGITATED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE US PERTAINS TO THE EXEMPTION CLAIM ED BY THE ASSESSEE U/S 10(20) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ( I N SHORT 'THE ACT') ON THE GROUND THAT IT WAS A LOCAL AUTHORITY . THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS HELD THAT T HE ASSESSEE DOES NOT FALL IN THE MEANING OF EXPRESSION LOCAL A UTHORITY AS ENSHRINED IN THE EXPLANATION BELOW SECTION 10(20) O F THE ACT. 3. BEFORE US, LEARNED D.R. APPEARING FOR THE REVENU E POINTED OUT THAT SIMILAR ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY 2 THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S AGRICULTURE PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE V DCIT IN ITA NOS. 697 TO 699/CHD/2008 DA TED 26.02.2010 PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003- 04 TO 2005-06. 4. WE HAVE PERUSED THE PRECEDENT AND FIND THAT IT H AS BEEN HELD THAT AGRICULTURE PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE CA NNOT BE CONSTRUED AS A LOCAL AUTHORITY WITHIN THE DEFINIT ION OF THE EXPRESSION LOCAL AUTHORITY PROVIDED IN THE EXPLAN ATION BELOW SECTION 10(20) OF THE ACT. AS A RESULT THEREOF, THE ISSUE IS DECIDED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE AND THE ACTION OF THE INCOME-TAX AUTHORITIES IN DENYING EXEMPTION TO THE ASSESSEE U/ S 10(20) OF THE ACT IS HEREBY AFFIRMED. 5. THE ONLY OTHER ISSUE RAISED IN THE APPEALS RELAT E TO THE CHARGING OF INTEREST U/S 234A AND 234B OF THE ACT W HICH, IN OUR VIEW IS CONSEQUENTIAL IN NATURE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE CAPTIONED APPEALS ARE DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31.08.2010. SD/- SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ( G.S.PANNU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 31 ST AUG., 2010. POONAM COPY TO : THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT (A)/ THE CIT/THE DR.