CIT CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PB,. STATE SPORTS COUNCIL

PDF · subscribers
ITA/289/2010HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01093206201002 August 2010Author: MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL,MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeals filed by the Revenue. The Court noted that the learned counsel for the Revenue conceded that the issue was covered against the Revenue by a previous decision of the same High Court. This previous decision, dated 31.07.2009 in ITA No. 666 of 2008 (Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh-II v. M/s Punjab Energy Development Agency), presumably dealt with the same substantial question of law regarding the treatment of interest income for the purposes of Sections 11, 12, and 13 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in the context of charitable or religious trusts. The High Court's reasoning was based on this precedent, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeals without delving into a fresh analysis of the merits. No specific operative directions were issued other than the dismissal of the appeals.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, Commissioner of Income Tax-II, filed three appeals (ITA Nos. 289-291 of 2010) under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order dated 24.06.2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh Bench-B. The appeals challenge the ITAT's decision concerning the assessment year(s) not explicitly stated in the provided text. The core of the dispute revolves around whether interest received by the respondent, M/s Punjab State Sports Council, should be considered income for the purposes of Sections 11, 12, and 13 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The ITAT had ruled in favour of the assessee.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was right in holding that the interest received has to be considered as income for the purpose of Sections 11, 12, and 13 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (question of law). Assessee's contentions: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue argued that interest received should be considered income for the purposes of Sections 11, 12, and 13 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. However, the learned counsel for the Revenue fairly stated that the matter is covered against the Revenue by a previous order of the High Court dated 31.07.2009 in ITA No. 666 of 2008 (Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh-II v. M/s Punjab Energy Development Agency).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A,Section 11,Section 12,Section 13

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. I.T.A. No.289 of 2010 & other connected cases being ITA Nos.290 and 291 of 2010 Date of decision: 2.8.2010 Commissioner of Income Tax-II -----Appellant. Vs. M/s Punjab State Sports Council. -----Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present:- Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Standing counsel for the Revenue. --- ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.

1.

This order will dispose of I.T.A. Nos.289 to 291 of 2010, as it is stated that identical questions are involved in all the appeals.

2.

I.T.A. No.289 of 2010 has been preferred by the Revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 24.6.2009 in I.T.A. No.410/Chandi/2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench-B, proposing to raise following substantial question of law:- “Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the ITAT was right in holding that the interest received has to be considered as income for I.T.A. No.289 of 2010 the purpose of section 11, 12 and 13 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.”

3.

Learned counsel for the revenue fairly states that the matter is covered against the revenue by order of this Court dated 31.7.2009 in I.T.A. No.666 of 2008 (Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh-II v. M/s Punjab Energy Development Agency).

4.

In view of above, these appeals are dismissed.

5.

A photocopy of this order be placed on the files of each connected case (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE August 02, 2010 ( AJAY KUMAR MITTAL ) ashwani JUDGE 2

More judgments on Section 260-A

All 2,570 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260-A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →