SERVANTS OF THE PEOPLE SOCIETY,NEW DELHI V. DCIT (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE 2(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 3182/DEL/2023

AI Insights

The case involves the Servants of the People Society, which appealed against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the assessment years 2015-16 to 2018-19. The primary issue was the denial of section 11 exemption benefit under the Income Tax Act, 1961, with the Revenue arguing that the Society's activities constituted trade, commerce, or business. The Tribunal noted that the matter had previously reached the Supreme Court, which restored the issue to the Assessing Officer for re-examination based on the precedent set in CIT Vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority. The Tribunal decided to follow the Supreme Court's directive, allowing the Society to present its case afresh.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 40573 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Other Referred Cases: CIT Vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority - [2022] 143 taxmann.com 278 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAYA CHAUDHARY
• Assessee Lawyers: ASEEM CHAWLA
• Keywords: Benefit of exemption
• Section: 143(3); 11

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.3181/Del/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 With ITA No.3182/Del/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-17 With ITA No.919/Del/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 With ITA No.3109/Del/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Servants of the People Society, Lajpat Bhawan, Lajpat Nagar-IV, New Delhi Vs. DCIT (Exemption), Circle-2, Delhi PAN:AAATS1730M (Appellant) (Respondent) ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM The assessee has filed its instant four appeals i.e. ITA No. 3181, 3182, 919 and 3109/Del/2023 against the Commissioner of Assessee by Sh. Aseem Chawla, Sr. Adv. Ms. Pratishtha Chaudhary, Adv. Ms. Sejal Garg, Proxy Counsel Department by Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, CIT(DR) Sh. Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR Date of hearing 01.04.2025 Date of pronouncement 01.04.2025 ITA Nos.3181, 3182, 919 & 3109/Del/2023 2 | P a g e Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s orders dated 07.09.2023, 25.08.2023, 30.01.2023 and 10.08.2023 having DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1055820136(1), ITBA/NFAC/S /250/2023-24/1055431678(1), ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 23/1049217904(1), ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1055037347(1); respectively involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2. Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused. 3. Learned senior counsel very fairly submits at the outset that both the lower authorities herein have denied section 11 exemption benefit to the assessee/appellant in their respective identical findings that it’s case in fact is covered under section 2(15) 1st proviso since falling in the last limb of general public utility. The Revenue’s case, on the other hand, is that both the learned lower authorities have arrived at their identical conclusion in all these four assessment years that the assessee in fact carries all its activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business, as the case may be. ITA Nos.3181, 3182, 919 & 3109/Del/2023 3 | P a g e 4. Faced with this situation, we sought to ascertain the assessee’s status all along as it is found to be an old trust carrying out its identical activities for almost hundred years. Learned senior counsel first invites our attention to the assessee’s case-law compilation running into 482 pages, wherefrom it is noticed that the very issue travelled upto the hon’ble apex court in assessment year 2011-12 involving the Revenue’s special leave petition i.e. SLP(C) No. 11017 of 2022. (pages 9 to 15). A perusal of their lordships detailed discussion dated 31st January, 2023 indicates that the very issue of assessee’s entitlement to claim section 11 exemption stand restored back to the Assessing Officer in light of CIT Vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority - [2022] 143 taxmann.com 278 (SC). Coupled with this learned senior counsel is equally fair in filing before us a copy of the Assessing Officer’s assessment order dated 14.03.2025 not making any disallowance/addition in its hands. 5. Be that as it may, we are of the considered view that once the hon’ble apex court had restored the matter back to the Assessing Officer to re-examine all the relevant facts in light of Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (supra), we hardly see any reason to ITA Nos.3181, 3182, 919 & 3109/Del/2023 4 | P a g e adopt a different approach since bound by judicial discipline. We thus adopt the very course of action herein as well and direct the learned Assessing Office to examine the assessee’s activities herein as per law. It is further made clear that the assessee shall indeed be at liberty to plead and prove all of its relevant evidence in support of it’s section 11 exemption claim in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly. All other issues between the parties in the instant four appeals are kept open at this stage. 6. These assessee’s four appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms. A copy of this order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the open court on 1st April, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (M. BALAGANESH) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 1st April, 2025. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi "