CONFEDERATION OF INDIAN TEXTILE INDUSTRY,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION)-1(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2242/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 July 2023AY 2016-20174 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in deciding the appeal ex-parte without adjudicating on merits and without considering the Tribunal's earlier decision in the assessee's own case on similar facts. The appeals were restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a confederation of Indian textile industry, claimed exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officer denied this exemption, treating income from non-members as business income based on the principle of mutuality. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in deciding the appeal ex-parte without considering the merits and previous judgments. Whether the assessee is entitled to exemption under Section 11 as a charitable entity or if its activities are based on mutuality.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11,Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C‘ BENCH

For Appellant: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash
For Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash
Hearing: 30/06/2023Pronounced: 10/07/2023

आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesaid appeals have been filed by the assessee against the separate impugned orders dated 15/05/2023 and 06/06/2023, for the quantum of the assessment passed u/s 143(3) for the A.Y. 2015-16 and 2016-17.

1.

& 2243/Mum/2023 AYs. 2015-16 & 2016-17 Confederation of Indian Textile Industry 2. In both the appeals common grounds raised are; firstly, the Ld. NFAC has erred in deciding the appeal of the assessee ex-parte without adjudicating the issues on its merits; secondly, non- granting of exemption u/s. 11 of the Act); and lastly, not relying the decision of earlier years including the current years to be carried forward for set-off in subsequent years. Apart from that in A.Y. 2016-17 assessee has taken ground for relief of TDS amounting to Rs. 1,496/-.

3.

Brief facts are that the assessee is registered u/s 12A of the Act looking to its charitable objects and its income and expenditure account was subject to computation and exemption u/s 11 of the Act. The assessee is confederation of Indian Textile Industry registered u/s 25 of the companies Act. Objects of the trust have been incorporated and the assessment order. The Ld. AO observed that, as per the memorandum of association assessee’s nature of activity is limit to its member only and working on ‘mutuality’ concept. However, he noted that income from non members be treated as business income and also after referring to CBDT circular no. 11/2008 dated 19/12/2008 and held that the assessee is a mutual association and not a charitable entity. Accordingly, he held that and entire receipt received from non members is actually business income and denied exemption u/s. 11. & 2243/Mum/2023 AYs. 2015-16 & 2016-17 Confederation of Indian Textile Industry 4. The Ld. CIT (A) has dismissed the appeal of ex-parte on the ground that notices send to the assessee was not complied with and without adjudicating on merits has confirmed the addition.

5.

Before us the Ld. Counsel brought on record that in AY 2013- 14, this Tribunal by order dated 17/07/2020 in has allowed the exemption u/s 11 on exactly similarly set of facts. However, Ld. DR submitted that the matter should be restored back to the file of the first appellate authority for deciding the issues on merits.

6.

We have considered the material on records and find that Ld. NFAC/CIT(A) has decided the ex-parte without adjudicating on merits and accordingly, without even considering the judgment of Tribunal in assessee’s own case on similarly set of facts. Accordingly, we restore both the appeals to the file of Ld. CIT (A)/NFAC to decide the issue on merits after considering the decision of the Tribunal and assessee’s own case and grant consequential relief.

7.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for the statistical purpose.

More judgments on Section 11

All 7,190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →