C.I.T. BIKANER vs. KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI, RAWLA

PDF · subscribers
ITA/149/2014HC RajasthanRJHC01026874201404 May 20162 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. The court noted that the controversy in the present appeal was covered by its previous decision rendered on April 26, 2016, in D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 47/13 (Commissioner of Income Tax, Bikaner vs. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Raisinghnagar) and other connected appeals. In that earlier decision, the court had upheld the ITAT's decision allowing the assessee's claim for exemption under Section 11(1)(a) of the Act and had accordingly dismissed the Revenue's appeals. Therefore, following that precedent, the present appeal was also dismissed. The specific reasoning of the earlier judgment regarding the allowability of the exemption under Section 11(1)(a) is not detailed here, but it formed the basis for dismissing this appeal. No issue was left undecided.

What were the facts?

The Revenue has filed this appeal against an order dated February 25, 2014, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Jodhpur Bench. The ITAT had dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. The CIT(A) had deleted additions made by the Assessing Officer, who had rejected the assessee's claim for exemption under Section 11(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee is Krishi Upaj Samiti, Rawla. The specific assessment year(s) are not mentioned in the judgment.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in dismissing the Revenue's appeal and upholding the deletion of additions made by the Assessing Officer, thereby allowing the assessee's claim for exemption under Section 11(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue's contention is not explicitly recorded in the judgment. The assessee's argument is also not explicitly recorded. However, the judgment indicates that the controversy is covered by a previous decision of the same court in similar matters.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11(1)(a)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Commissioner of Income Tax-Bikaner Vs. Krishi Upaj Samiti, Rawla (D. B. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.149/2014) Date of Order : 4.5.16 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH CHANDRA SHARMA Mr. K.K. Bissa, for the appellant.

1.

The requirement of production of certified copy of the impugned order is dispensed with.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant.

3.

This appeal is directed against order dated 25.2.14 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur, whereby the appeal preferred by the Revenue, questioning the legality of the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT (A)], deleting the additions made by the Assessing Officer while rejecting the claim of the assessee for exemption under Section 11(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( for short “the Act”), stands dismissed.

4.

The controversy involved in the present appeal stands covered by decision of this court rendered on 26.4.16 in D.B.Income Tax Appeal No.47/13 (Commissioner of Income Tax, Bikaner vs. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Raisinghnagar) & other connected appeals, whereby the decision of the ITAT in identical matters allowing the claim of the assessee for exemption under Section 11(1)(a) of the Act, has been upheld and accordingly, the appeals have been dismissed.

( 2 )

5.

In this view of the matter, this appeal is also dismissed in light of decision of this court in Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Raisinghnagar's case (supra). (KAILASH CHANDRA SHARMA), J. (SANGEET LODHA), J. vij 24

More judgments on Section 11(1)(a)

All 553 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11(1)(a) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →