ENTERTAINMENT SOCIETY OF GOA.,PANAJI vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANAJI., PANAJI

आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, पणजी न्यायपीठ, पणजी IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI, BENCH PANAJI श्री ऱलऱत कुमार, न्याययक सदस्य एवं डॉ मीठा ऱाऱ मीना, ऱेखा सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM AND DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, AM (AY: 2010-2011) Entertainment Society of Goa, Vs CIT, Panaji, Goa-403001 Old GMC Heritage Precint, D.B.Marg, Campal, Panaji-Goa PAN : AAATE 2498 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Gaurang Panandiker, Adv. राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Prabhat Jha, CIT DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 04/10/2021 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 04/10/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench :

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated.20.03.2015, passed by the Pr.CIT, Panaji for the assessment year 2010-2011, on the following grounds :-

1. The learned CIT erred in exercising jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act in respect of the assessment order passed by the assessing officer considering the appellant trust as a registered trust u/s 11, 12 and 13 of I T Act.

2. The learned CIT erred in holding that the order passed by the assessing officer under section 143(3) of the Act dated 31/01/2013 is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.

3. The learned CIT ought not to have exercised jurisdiction in respect of matters accei3ied'after due application of mind by the assessing officer.

4. The learned CIT erred in giving directions u/s 263 of IT Act to the assessing officer by ignoring the appeal filed by the appellant trust before jurisdictional Bombay High Court against the order of the CIT withdrawing its registration u/s 12AA(3) of IT Act.

5. The learned CIT erred in exercising jurisdiction under section 263 of IT Act on the ground that the deductions claimed by the appellant trust in the status of a registered trust were allowed to it by the assessing officer despite the fact that no such deductions were allowed by the assessing officer to the appellant trust in her assessment order passed for the year.

6. On the facts and circumstance sof the case the order of othe learned THE LEARNED CIT(A) u/s 263 of IT Act was not in accordance with the law because the assessing officer’s action of not considering the issue of withdrawal of registration of the appellant trust granted earlier u/s.12A of IT Act at the time of passing the assessment for the year has not caused any loss of revenue to the Income Tax Department. 2. Facts in brief are that the assessee filed its return of income on 10.10.2010 for A.Y.2010-2011 declaring total income at Rs.Nil. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and the AO completed the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act, whereby the AO accepted the returned income of the assessee. Thereafter the Pr.CIT, Panaji invoking its power u/s.263 of the Act set aside the order passed by the AO /s.143(3) of the Act holing that the order passed by the AO is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. Now, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order passed u/s.263 of the Act. 3. Learned AR, at the outset, drew our attention to the order of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court by virtue of which the order u/s.12A of the Act was granted in favour of the assessee along with other bunch of appeal, vide order dated 4th February, 2020 in Tax Appeal No.15/2013. It was further submitted that the order passed by the Pr.CIT invoking jurisdiction u/s.263 of the Act was on the premises that the assessee was not having registration u/s.12A of the Act. It was submitted that the since the order passed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court at Goa has approved 3 12AA in favour of the assessee, therefore, the order passed by the Pr.CIT is required to be quashed.