The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti Vidisha

PDF · subscribers
MAIT/182/2007HC Madhya Pradesh25 November 2019Author: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE1 pages
For Petitioner: Sanjeev Tuli,Anubhav JainFor Respondent: Abhishek Oswal,Ll.Sharma,M.Sharma
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. The dismissal was based on the concession made by the Revenue's counsel that the outcome of the appeal would be governed by the decision in M.A.I.T.No.201/2007 (Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Jabalpur Vs. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Rewa), which was decided on the same date. Since the appeal in M.A.I.T.No.201/2007 was dismissed, this appeal was also dismissed in similar terms. The High Court did not independently analyze the charitable nature of the assessee's work or the applicability of Sections 12A and 12AA. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal, upholding the ITAT's order directing registration under Section 12A. No issues were left undecided; the appeal was disposed of based on the concession and the outcome of a related case.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhopal (Revenue) filed an appeal before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Indore Bench. The ITAT's order, dated July 20, 2007, directed the registration of Krishi Upaj Mandi, Vidisha (assessee) under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The High Court admitted the appeal on November 29, 2007, to decide a substantial question of law concerning the assessee's eligibility for benefits under Sections 12A and 12AA of the Act. The Revenue's counsel conceded that the decision in a similar case, M.A.I.T.No.201/2007 (Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Jabalpur Vs. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Rewa), would govern this appeal. That related appeal was dismissed by the High Court on the same date.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that the Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Vidisha, is engaged in charitable work and therefore entitled to the benefits under Section 12-A and 12-AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961? Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the assessee before the High Court. However, the ITAT's order directing registration under Section 12A implies the assessee argued it was engaged in charitable activities. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, through its counsel, did not dispute that the detailed order passed in a connected matter, M.A.I.T.No.201/2007, would govern the decision of this appeal. This suggests the Revenue accepted the factual and legal premise of the ITAT's decision in the connected case, which was subsequently dismissed by the High Court.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A,Section 12AA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
-( 1 )- THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: JABALPUR (Division Bench) M.A.I.T.No.182/2007 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhopal (M.P.) ….Appellant/Revenue Versus Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Vidisha District Vidisha (M.P.) …Respondent/assessee Coram Hon’ble Shri Justice Ajay Kumar Mittal, Chief Justice Hon’ble Shri Justice Mohd. Fahim Anwar, Judge Appearance Shri Sanjay Lal, Advocate for the appellant/Revenue.

O R D E R (25.11.2019)

Per: Ajay Kumar Mittal, C.J. (Oral)

The Revenue has filed this appeal against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, Indore passed in I.T.A.No.405/Ind/2007 dated 20.7.2007 directing registration of the assessee-Krishi Upaj Mandi under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. This appeal was admitted on 29.11.2007 for determination of the following substantial question of law:- “Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jabalpur is justified in coming to hold that the Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, the first respondent is engaged in charitable work and, therefore, he is entitled to get the benefit under Section 12-A and 12-AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961?”

3.

It was not disputed by the learned counsel for the revenue that detailed order passed in M.A.I.T.No.201/2007 (The Commissioner of Income Tax-II, M.A.I.T.No.201/2007 (The Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Jabalpur Vs. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Rewa), where the appeal has been dismissed, this appeal is also dismissed.

(Ajay Kumar Mittal) (Mohd. Fahim Anwar) Chief Justice

Judge

C. CHRISTOPHER PHILIP Date: 2020.01.27 17:06:52 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 12A

All 6,064 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →