THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/748/2019HC GujaratGJHC24066381201923 December 2019Author: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI,HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the controversy in the present appeal was concluded by its own judgment dated September 27, 2019, passed in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) v. Gujarat Cricket Association, rendered in Tax Appeals No. 268 of 2012 and allied matters. In that prior judgment, the issues were decided in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue. Consequently, the High Court found that the present appeal did not give rise to any question of law, much less a substantial question of law, warranting interference. The appeal was therefore dismissed. The reasoning is based on the principle of res judicata or the binding precedent of its own prior decision on identical issues.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order dated March 4, 2019, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Ahmedabad Bench 'D'. The appeal pertains to assessment year 2008-09 and challenges the ITAT's decision regarding exemptions claimed by the assessee, Gujarat Cricket Association. The procedural history involves a prior appeal before the High Court in Tax Appeals No. 268 of 2012 and allied matters, which was decided on September 27, 2019, in favor of the assessee. The Revenue's current appeal proposes three substantial questions of law.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide three questions of law: 1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in allowing exemptions under Section 11 of the Act on the ground that registration under Section 12AA had been restored, without considering that the issue had not reached finality as the Revenue's appeal was pending before the High Court. 2. Whether the Tribunal was justified in confirming the deletion of additions made in respect of corpus donations under Section 11(1)(d) of the Act, without appreciating that the assessee failed to discharge its onus by not bringing anything on record in support of its claim of corpus donation. 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in allowing the capital expenditure of Rs. 8,76,56,542 as application of income towards the objects of the trust on the ground that registration under Section 12AA had been restored, without considering that the issue had not reached finality as the Revenue's appeal was pending before the High Court. The Revenue argued that the ITAT's decision on exemptions and capital expenditure was premature as its own appeal was pending. The Revenue also contended that the assessee failed to prove its claim for corpus donations. The judgment does not record specific arguments from the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 11,Section 11(1)(d),Section 12AA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
C/TAXAP/748/2019 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 748 of 2019 ========================================================== THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) Versus GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION ========================================================== Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI and HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN Date : 23/12/2019

ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI)

1.

By   this   appeal   under   section   260A   of   the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), the appellant Revenue has challenged the order dated 04.03.2019 made by the Income Tax Appellate   Tribunal,   Ahmedabad   Bench   ‘D’   in   ITA No.2680/Ahd/2011 for assessment year 2008­09 by proposing the following three questions stated to be substantial questions of law: “[A]   Whether,   on   the   facts   and   in   the circumstances   of   the   case   and   in   law,   the Appellate Tribunal was justified in allowing the benefit of exemptions u/s.11 of the Act on the ground that registration u/s.12AA had been restored back, without considering that the   issue   had   not   reached   finality   as   the C/TAXAP/748/2019 ORDER revenue’s   appeal   is   pending   before   this Hon’ble Court? [B] Whether   on   the   facts   and   in   the circumstances   of   the   case   and   in   law,   the Appellate   Tribunal   was   justified   in confirming the deletion of addition made in respect of corpus donations u/s. 11(1)(d) of the   Act   without   appreciating   that   the assessee failed to discharge its onus by not bringing anything on record in support of its claim of corpus donation? [C]  Whether   on   the   facts   and   circumstances of   the   case   and   in   law,   the   Appellate Tribunal   was   justified   in   allowing   the capital   expenditure   of   Rs.8,76,56,542/­   as application of income towards the objects of the   trust   on   the   ground   that   registration u/s.12AA   had   been   restored   back,   without considering  that  the  issue   had  not  reached finality as the revenue’s appeal is pending before this Hon’ble Court?”

2.

Heard   Mrs.   Mauna   Bhatt,   learned   senior standing   counsel   for   the   appellant,   who   has reiterated the grounds set out in the memorandum of appeal.

3.

It   is   an   admitted   position   that   the controversy involved in the present case stands concluded by a judgment dated 27.09.2019 passed by   this   court   in   the   case   of   Commissioner   of Income   Tax   (Exemption)   v.   Gujarat   Cricket Association   rendered   in   Tax   Appeals   No.268   of 2012 and allied matters, wherein the issue has C/TAXAP/748/2019 ORDER been   decided   in   favour   of   the   assessee   and against the Revenue. Under the circumstances, it is   not   necessary   to   set   out   the   facts   and contentions in detail.

4.

For the reasons recorded in the judgment and order dated 27.09.2019 made in Tax Appeals No.268 of 2012 and allied matters, this appeal does not give rise to any question of law, much less, a substantial   question   of   law,   warranting interference.   The   appeal,   therefore,   fails   and is, accordingly, dismissed. (HARSHA DEVANI, J) (SANGEETA K. VISHEN,J) PRAVIN KARUNAN

More judgments on Section 11

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →