M/S. SADIA EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,SHIMOGA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SHIMOGA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1369/BANG/2016Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2020AY 2009-102 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the reassessment proceedings were bad in law due to lack of requisite jurisdiction. It also found that the authorities below erred in denying the claim of exemption under Section 10(23C)(iiiad) without proper appreciation of facts and law.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sadia Educational and Charitable Trust, filed appeals against orders denying exemption under Section 10(23C)(iiiad) and challenging reassessment proceedings. The trust argued it existed solely for educational purposes and was entitled to exemption benefits.

What were the issues?

Whether the reassessment proceedings were validly initiated and whether the trust was eligible for exemption as an educational institution.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 12AA,Section 12A(2),Section 11

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI A. K. GARODIA & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri. Manjeet Singh, Addl. CIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Hearing: 09.03.2020Pronounced: 29.05.2020

Assessee by : Shri. V. Srinivasan, Advocate Revenue by : Shri. Manjeet Singh, Addl. CIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru Date of hearing : 09.03.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 29.05.2020 O R D E R Per A.K. Garodia, Accountant Member All these three appeals are filed by the assessee and these are directed against three separate orders of learned CIT(A) Davangere, all dated 28.03.2016 for Assessment Years 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11. All these to 1370/Bang/2016 Page 2 of 8 appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by way of this common order for the sake of convenience.

2.

The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under:

1. The orders of the authorities below in so far as they are against the appellant are opposed to law, equity, and weight of evidence, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the case.

2. The order of re-assessment is bad in law and void-ab-initio for want of requisite jurisdiction especially, the mandatory requirements to assume jurisdiction u/s 148 of the Act did not exist and have not been complied with and consequently, the re-assessment requires to be cancelled. 3. The authorities below are not justified in denying the claim of exemption u/s.10[23C][iiiad] of the Act on an erroneous appreciation of facts and position of law under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case. 3.1 The authorities below are not justified in holding that the appellant Trust did not exist solely for educational purposes for denying exemption u/s. 10[23C][iiiad] of the Act, under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case. 4. Without prejudice to the above, the authorities below ought to have appreciated that the appellant had secured registration u/s. 12AA of the Act in terms of the orders of the Hon'ble ITAT and in accordance with the provisions of the first and second proviso to sec. 12A[2] of the Act, the appellant was entitled to the benefits of the registration secured even for the earlier assessment years and hence, the computation of income without allowing the benefit of exemption u/s. 11 of the Act is unjustified and liable to be vacated.

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →