ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(2),, PUNE vs. M/S SINHGAD TECHNICAL EDUCATION SOCIETY (TRUST), PUNE

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sl. IT(SS)A No./ Name of Appellant Name of Respondent Asst. No. ITA No. Year 1-7 44/PUN/2017 M/s. Sinhagad DCIT, Central Circle- 2008-09 45/PUN/2017 Technical Education 2(2), Pune. 2009-10 46/PUN/2017 Society, 2010-11 47/PUN/2017 S.No.44/1, Vadgaon 2011-12 48/PUN/2017 (Budruk), Off. 2012-13 49/PUN/2017 Sinhagad Road, 2013-14 50/PUN/2017 Pune- 411041. 2014-15 PAN : AABTS9900Q 8-14 54/PUN/2017 ACIT, Central Circle- M/s. Sinhagad 2008-09 55/PUN/2017 2(2), Pune. Technical Education 2009-10 56/PUN/2017 Society (Trust), 2010-11 57/PUN/2017 S.No.44/1, Vadgaon 2011-12 58/PUN/2017 (Budruk), Off. 2012-13 59/PUN/2017 Sinhagad Road, Pune- 2013-14 1654/PUN/2017 411041. 2014-15 PAN : AABTS9900Q Assessee by : Shri Chetan A. Karia Shri Suhas P. Bora Revenue by : Shri Abhinay Kumbhar Date of hearing 27.01.2022 : Date of pronouncement 01.04.2022 : आदेश / ORDER PER BENCH : These are the cross appeals filed by the assessee society as well as by the Revenue directed against the common orders of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 12, Pune [‘CIT(A)’ for

2 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society short] dated 26.04.2017 for the assessment years 2008-09 to 2014-15 respectively. 2. Since the identical facts and issues are involved in all above captioned cross appeals, therefore, we proceed to dispose of the same by this common order. 3. The brief factual background of the case is that the appellant society is a Trust, namely, M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society established under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950. It was founded in the year 1993 with the objects of imparting the education. The appellant society is also registered u/s 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’). It is running several Colleges i.e. it has got 12 Campuses and 97 Institutions in the State of Maharashtra. 4. A search and seizure operations were conducted under the provisions of section 132 of the Income Tax Act, in the premises of the appellant society on 06.08.2013. As a result of search and seizure action, several documents, loose papers had been found and seized. According to the Assessing Officer, these loose sheets indicated collection of capitation fees for admission of the students under Management Quota in the various institutions of the appellant

3 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society society. The details of seized assets and documents found unearthed as result of search and seizure operations as set out by the AO vide page no.2 of the assessment order as under :- Sr. Cash (in Rs.) Particulars of Premises with Jewellery (valued in Rs.) Seized / No. address impounded Found Seized Found Seized documents. (Number mentioned in bracket is digital seized material) 1 295310 295310 0 0 Society Office STE Society Total bundles 14 Campus, S. No. 44/1, Vadgaon (Bk.), Off Sinhgad Road , Pune 2 1489870 1364000 0 0 Office of Shri. Arvind V. 7+15=22 Deshpande, Principal, Smt. (1) (1) Kashibai Navale College of Engg. STE Society Campus, S.No. 44/1, Vadgaon (Bk.), Off Sinhgad Road , Pune 411 041 3 12520 0 0 0 1 Office of Dr. Janardan Garde, (1) of Sinhgad Dental College and Hospital. STE Society Campus , S. No. 44/1, Vadgaon (Bk.), Off Sinhgad Road , Pune 4 0 0 0 0 2 Office of Dr. Arvind V. Bhore, Dean of Smt. Kashibai Navale Medical College and General Hospital, S. No 49/1,Westerly Bypass Road, Narhe (Ambegaon), Pune- 411041

5 0 0 0 0 0 Office of Dr. S. N. Khandalkar, Medical Supdt. of Smt. Kashibai Navale Medical College and General Hospital S, No 49/1,Westerly Bypass Road, Narhe (Ambegaon), Pune- 411041

4 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society 0 0 0 0 Office of Sinhgad Technical 4+1=5 6 Education Society (STES) at (2) (2) Erandwane Plot no 15, Survey no 19, Erandwane, Smt Khilare Marg, Off Karve Road, Erandwane, Pune 0 0 526362 0 Premises at NDA Road, Plot 0 7 No.101/15, NDA Road, Warje, Pune

0 0 0 0 Academic Section of 70 8 Administrative office of Sinhgad Dental College and Hospital SDCH, STE Society Campus, S.No.44/1, Vadgaon (Bk), Off Sinhgad Road, Pune 5. For the sake of clarity and convenience, the facts relevant to the appeal in IT(SS)A No.50/PUN/2017 for the assessment year 2014-15 are stated herein. 6. Based on the impugned documents, the AO had come to the conclusion that the appellant society had undisclosed income. Accordingly, a notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued on 04.02.2014 for the assessment year 2014-15. In response to notice u/s 153A of the Act, the return of income was filed on 29.09.2014 disclosing total income at Rs.Nil after claiming exemption u/s 11 of the Act. 7. Based on the information contained in the loose sheets found as result of search and seizure action, the Assessing Officer came to conclusion that incriminating documents so found indicated the

5 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society receipt of capitation fees which is unaccounted in the books of accounts of the appellant society. Therefore, the case was taken for scrutiny assessment and the Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 30.03.2016 for the assessment year 2014-15 at total income of Rs.112,31,71,443/- bringing to tax the capitation fees collected denying the exemption of income u/s 11 of the Act and taxed the total income at maximum marginal rate of tax. While doing so, the Assessing Officer had brought to tax the excess income of expenditure of Rs.89,65,46,443/- and unaccounted capitation fees of Rs.22,66,25,000/-. The factual matrix of the case leading to the above additions is as under : There was a search and seizure operations conducted u/s 132 of the Act on 06.08.2013. As a result of search and seizure operations, the cash amounting to Rs.17,97,700/- was found. Out of which, the cash of Rs.13,64,000/- was seized and certain documents were impounded as set out by the Assessing Officer in para 1 of the assessment order (extracted supra). During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer had analyzed the seized materials and also considered the statements recorded by the

6 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society Investigation Wing of the Department from three persons u/s 132(4) of the Act and had come to conclusion that the appellant society had indulged in collection of capitation fees for admission of students under Management Quota, which is against the public policy as well as the provisions of Maharashtra Educational Act. The incriminating materials found as a result of search and seizure actions indicating that the appellant society had been indulging in collection of capitation fees are as under :- “Seized / Impounded pages which evidence acceptance of capitation fees i. Notings made on application Forms and their enclosures a. Notings made by Shri. Arvind V. Deshpande b. Notings made by Shri. Sharad D. Bhosale ii. Notings made on Chits of paper/ letters a. Notings made by Shri. Arvind V. Deshpande b. Notings made by Shri. Maruti N Navale iii. Envelopes found in cabin of Shri. Sharad Bhosale containing cash and corresponding notings on reverse of forms/enclosures iv. Refund of Donations/Capitation Fees upon cancellation of admission under Management Quota a. Letters / communications/notings regarding refund of Capitation fees / donations to students against cancellation of admission under Management Quota b. Cash Receipt Vouchers from students acknowledging refund of capitation fees in cash v. Rate-lists about Donation rates a. Rate- list for admissions to PG Seats found at the residence of Shri. Arvind Deshpande b. Rate- list for admissions to PG Dental Seats found at the Main Office of STES at Erandvane

7 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society vi. Collection-Utilization details: Pages seized from the residence of Shri. Sharad Bhosale vii. Recommendation letters urging waiver/concessions in donations for seats under Management Quota viii. Instances of Fees paid for one course ADJUSTED against capitation fees/ donation for another course ix. Bundle No, 11 Seized from Shri. Sharad Bhosale’s Cabin at Society (STES) Office x. Page depicting cash collections for MBBS Admissions for AY 2013-14 xi. Role of Admission Agents in MQ Admissions for STES a) Regular SMS exchange between Shri. Deshpande and Admission agents b) Notings bearing names of admission agents on the reverse of Documents /Forms c) Documents seized from one admission agent Shri. Surendra Nagar d) Chit noting by Shri Deshpande mentioning name of admission agent xii. Digital Back-up of Phone/ SMS a) SMS From Dr. Garde's Mobile phone number b) SMS Back up From Shri. Arvind Deshpande’s Mobile phone number - 9881000780 xiii. Statements recorded in support of finding of Capitation Fees Collection by STES : Statements of Dr. Janardan Garde, Shri. Arvind Deshpande and Shri. Sharad Bhosale.” 8. The Assessing Officer had analyzed the notings found on the Application Forms of the students admitted under Management Quota. He also set out the procedure adopted for admission of the students under Management Quota as well as the modus operandi adopted for collection of capitation fees vide para 4 of the assessment order. (For the sake brevity of the order we chosen not

8 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society to reproduce the order). The Assessing Officer also reproduced the scanned images of the notings on the Application Forms at page 8 of the assessment order. According to the Assessing Officer, these notings were made by one Shri Arvind Deshpande, who was the Principal of Smt. Kashibai Navale Engineering College, Pune, an institution runs by the appellant society, another person viz. Shri Sharad Bhosale who was the Accounts Officer of the appellant society. 9. The Assessing Officer also examined the statements given by Shri Arvind Deshpande, Shri Sharad Bhosale and Dr. Janardan Garde u/s 132(4) of the Act on the above notings and had come to conclusion that Shri Sharad Bhosale is the person who actually collected the amount of donation/capitation fees for admission of the students under Management Quota in cash under instructions from Shri Arvind Deshpande, Dr. Janardan Garde and Shri Maruti N. Navale, who is the President of the appellant society. 10. According to the Assessing Officer, the modus operandi adopted by Shri Arvind Deshpande and Shri Sharad Bhosale for the purpose of collection of capitation fees was that after the finalization of the capitation fees and discussion with the students or

9 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society their parents of the students by Shri Arvind Deshpande, the students were directed to meet one Shri Sharad Bhosale for the purpose of depositing the capitation fees and on receipt of the capitation fees, Shri Sharad Bhosale noted down the date of receipt, amount of receipt, capitation fees/donations etc. The sum and substance of the case set up by the Assessing Officer is that the notings made in the application forms, when confronted with makers of the statement, namely, Shri Arvind Deshpande, Shri Sharda Bhosale and Dr. Janardan Garde u/s 132(4). According to the Assessing Officer, the above said three persons had decoded the figures and data found in the notings/chits and also confirmed that Shri Arvind Deshpande and Dr. Janardan Garde were approached by the students and their parents for admission under the management quota in various course of the institutions run by the appellant society. Both Shri Arvind Deshpande and Dr. Janardan Garde also finalized with the students and their parents regarding the amount of capitation fees after negotiations. On finalization of the amount of capitation fees to be collected, the students and their parents were directed to meet Shri Sharad Bhosale for the purpose of depositing in cash the capitation fees. The Assessing Officer also analyzed the contents of

10 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society the notings found in the loose sheets and the statement of Shri Arvind Deshpande are also reproduced at page no. 9 and 10 of the assessment order, wherein Shri Arvind Deshpande had admitted that the notings on the application forms were made by him in relation to the collection of capitation fees from the students whose names were mentioned in the chits for admission under the management quota. Shri Arvind Deshpande also decoded the figures found in the loose sheets. The scanned images of notings were also reproduced at page no.8 of the assessment order. The Assessing Officer also reproduced the statement of Shri Sharad Bhosale, who is an Accounts Officer of the appellant society recorded u/s 132(4), wherein the said Shri Sharad Bhosale had admitted that the amounts as mentioned by Shri Arvind Deshpande on the notings made in the application forms were received by him and the figures mentioned in the loose sheets represent the amount in ‘Lakhs’. The AO also considered the statement recorded from Dr. Janardan Garde u/s 132(4), who looks after admissions to PG and UG Dental courses under management quota, reproduced at page no.50, 51, 52, 53 and 54 of the assessment order wherein, the said Dr. Janardan Garde had stated that he was only acting as per the instructions of Shri Maruti

11 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society N. Navale and he was responsible for negotiation with the students and their parents for capitation fees. He also confirmed that the SMS messages exchanged between Shri Arvind Deshpande and Shri Sharad Bhosale are regarding the capitation fees charge. Another statement was recorded from Dr. Janardan Garde on 21st August, 2013 wherein, he stated that the answers given by him in the statement recorded u/s 132(4) are based on the fact and the statement was given voluntarily without influenced by anybody/any fears and without any threat. Based on the notings found in the loose sheets and the statements recorded from these three persons, the Assessing Officer had come to the conclusion that the appellant society had been indulging in the collection of capitation fees for admission of the students under the management quota. The summary of the total capitation fees so received arrived at Rs.5223.85 lakhs as set out by the Assessing Officer at page no.16 of the assessment order. Out of which, an amount of Rs.2266,25,000/- was received during the previous year relevant to the assessment year 2014-15. It is pertinent to note that the amount of capitation fees so arrived at is not based on the extrapolation of evidence.

12 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society 11. According to the Assessing Officer, the notings on the chits also revealed that the above said three persons were acting on the instructions of the President of appellant society i.e. Shri Maruti N. Navale. The scanned images of relevant notings were reproduced at page no.21, 23 and 24 of the assessment order. 12. During the course of search and seizure operations, the Investigation Wing of the Department found in the cabin of the Principal of SKN College of Engineering, Vadgaon, Pune certain loose papers containing recommendation letters from the eminent persons or very important person requesting Shri Maruti N. Navale, President of the appellant society to grant the admission to the recommended student under the management quota by either reducing the donation amount or by waiving off the donation amount. The scanned images of these recommendation letters were reproduced by the Assessing Officer at page no.32 and 33 of the assessment order. According to the Assessing Officer, these recommendation letters clearly prove the fact that the appellant society had been accepting the capitation fees for admission of the students under the management quota for various courses. The seized material from the cabin of Shri Sharad Bhosale i.e. the

13 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society society office containing four pages shows the transfer of cash collected at Lonavala Campus of STES from the students admitted under the management quota. The Assessing Officer also highlighted the role played by the admission agent in collection of capitation fees for admission of the students under the management quota. The SMS conversation between the admission agent and Shri Arvind Deshpande were also extracted at page no.38 and 39 of the assessment order, which clearly indicates that the appellant society had been in the habit of collection of the capitation fees for admission of the students under the management quota. The search and seizure operations were also conducted in the residential premises of one of the admission agents, namely, Shri Surendra Nagar. During the course of said search and seizure operations, the loose papers containing 33 pages were found. The loose papers are in handwriting of Shri Arvind Deshpande. The scanned image of one of the loose papers is also reproduced at page no.41 of the assessment order. The statement of said Shri Surendra Nagar was also recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act wherein, he had clearly admitted that he was working as an admission agent for the appellant society in coordination with Shri Arvind Deshpande and Shri Sharad

14 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society Bhosale for admission of the students under the management quota in consideration of some commission. The statement recorded from Shri Surendra Nagar was reproduced by the Assessing Officer in page no.41, 42 and 43 of the assessment order. Further, the Assessing Officer also took note of the digital backup of mobile of Shri Arvind Deshpande as well as digital data of Dr. Janardan Garde, who looks after the admissions to PG Dental Colleges. According to the AO, the SMS messages received by both these persons proved their close involvement in collection of capitation fees for admission under the management quota. The exchange of SMS messages between these two persons are extracted by the Assessing Officer at page no.45 and 46 of the assessment order. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO had confronted to the appellant society with the above evidences, the appellant society vide its letter dated 06.10.2015 had stated that names of the authorized persons for admission process had been published advertisement in newspapers and all the above three persons were not among the authorized persons for admission process. The appellant society also submitted that the statements recorded u/s 132(4) from Shri Arvind Deshpande, Shri Sharad

15 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society Bhosale and Dr. Janardan Garde were retracted by filing the affidavits on 16.04.2014 after gap of 7 months. However, the Assessing Officer said that the retraction statements cannot be given credence by holding that the retractions statements are afterthought and retractions statements were given after gap of 7 months. The Assessing Officer also issued letters to the students/parents of the students, who were allegedly to have been paid the capitation fees for admission under the management quota in the colleges of the appellant society. One of them, Ms. Mrinalini Patankar, ex-student of Sinhagad Collect of Architecture and her father Shri Sudhir Patankar had confirmed having paid capitation fees of Rs.6,00,000/- for admission under the management quota. In the statement recorded u/s 131 of the Act, even the student, namely, Ms. Mrinalini Patankar also corroborated this fact. 13. On cumulative consideration of all the above evidences narrated above, the Assessing Officer concluded that the appellant society had been in the habit of collection of capitation fees for admission under the management quota in various institutions and quantified the capitation fees at Rs.5223.85 lakhs during the period commencing form financial year 2008-09 to 2013-14 under

16 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society consideration as per working set out at page no.93 and 94 of the assessment order. 14. The Assessing Officer had further proceeded to hold that the capitation fees so collected by the appellant society was siphoned off by the President of the appellant society, namely, Shri Maruti N. Navale. According to the AO, the funds so siphoned off by Shir M.N. Navale were introduced by him in the accommodation bills for jewellery sale and cash deposit of Rs.3,00,84,382/-. The Assessing Officer further held that the capitation fees so collected by the appellant society was siphoned off by another family members who are specified persons under the provisions of section 13(1)(c) of the Act, Accordingly, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 13(1)(c) r.w.s. 13(2)(b) by holding that Shri Maruti N. Navale, President/Chairman, Smt. Sunanda M. Navale, Secretary, Shri Rohit M. Navale & Ms. Rachana M. Navale, Vice Presidents are using the property of the appellant society for the residential purposes without compensating the appellant society. 15. The Assessing Officer also denied the exemption of income from property held under trust u/s 11 of the Act on account of

17 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society violation of provisions of section 13(1)(c) and assessed the excesses income over expenditure at maximum marginal rate of tax. 16. Being aggrieved by the above order of assessment, an appeal was filed by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) challenging the findings of the Assessing Officer that : (i) The appellant society had collected capitation fees or donations for admission of the students under the management quota and the same was siphoned off by the President of the appellant society, namely, Shri Maruti N. Navale for personal enrichment on the ground that the findings/conclusions reached by the Assessing Officer in the form of statement recorded u/s 131 of the Act from the students and their parents was neither placed on the record of the assessment nor furnished to the appellant society. (ii) The statement recorded from one of the student, namely. Ms. Mrinalini Patankar and her father Shri Sudhir Patankar, who had confirmed the payment of capitation fees, was not allowed to cross-examine of them. (iii) The Assessing Officer had reached the conclusion that the appellant society had been indulging in collection of capitation fees without examining the Principals, Directors, Dean, who are authorized to grant the admission. It is further contended that the Assessing Officer ought not to have returned the findings that the entire amount, which was found

18 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society during the course of search and seizure operations, was collected as capitation fees or donations for admission of the students under the management quota and the same was siphoned off by the President of the appellant society, namely, Shri Maruti N. Navale for personal enrichment. (iv) The appellant society challenged the findings of the Assessing Officer on violation of the provisions of section 13(1)(c) of the Act on the ground that the payment of unreasonable rent by the appellant society in respect of the property owned by Shri Maruti N. Navale (HUF) and providing rent free accommodations to Shri Maruti N. Navale and his family members. (v) The appellant society also challenged the action of the Assessing Officer withdrawing the exemption u/s 11 of the Act. 17. After due consideration of the details/submissions made on behalf of the appellant society, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the findings of the Assessing Officer that the appellant society had been accepting the cash donations or capitation fees outside the books of accounts towards admission of the students under the management quota in the various institutions run by the appellant society. The ld. CIT(A) also confirmed the findings of the Assessing Officer that the capitation fees so collected by the appellant society had been

19 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society siphoned off by the President of the appellant society, namely, Shri Maruti N. Navale for his personal enrichment. The ld. CIT(A) also enhanced the quantum of capitation fees to Rs.5726.60 lakhs. The ld. CIT(A) also confirmed the findings of the Assessing Officer that the appellant society had violated the provisions of section 13(1)(c) of the Act. However, as regards to the interest paid to M/s. M.N. Navale Investment and Finance Ltd., the ld. CIT(A) returned the findings that it does not amount to violation of provisions of section 13(1)(c) of the Act. As regards to the exemption u/s 11 of the Act, ld. CIT(A) upheld the action of the Assessing Officer withdrawing the exemption claimed u/s 11 of the Act and directed the Assessing Officer to tax the entire income of the appellant society in respect of income not eligible for exemption u/s 11 under the normal rate of tax whereas, in respect of income resulted on account of violation of provisions of section 13(1)(c) to be taxed at maximum marginal rate of tax. Thus, the appeal filed by the assessee came to be partly allowed by the ld. CIT(A). 18. Being aggrieved by the decision of the ld. CIT(A), which is against the assessee, the assessee is in appeal before us in IT(SS)A No.50/PUN/2017 for the assessment year 2014-15. Being

20 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society aggrieved by the findings of the ld. CIT(A) that the income not hit by violation of provisions of section 13(1)(c) be taxed at the normal rate of tax, the Revenue is in appeal in ITA No.1654/PUN/2017 for the assessment year 2014-15. IT(SS)A No.50/PUN/2017, A.Y. 2014-15 – By Assessee : 19. Now, we shall take up the assessee’s appeal in IT(SS)A No.50/PUN/2017 for the assessment year 2014-15. 20. It is contended before us that the ld. CIT(A) ought not to have sustained the findings of the Assessing Officer that the appellant had been indulging in collection of the capitation fees in the absence of cogent material, concrete evidence, much less of corroborative evidence, especially in the light of fact that there was no complaint of acceptance of capitation fees under the provisions of the Maharashtra Educational Institution (Prohibition of Capitation Fees) Act, 1987. It is further contended that the statements recorded u/s 132(4) by the Investigation Wing of the Department from Shri Arvind Deshpande, Shri Sharad Bhosale and Dr. Janardan Garde have no evidentiary value in the light of the fact that the said statements were retracted by an affidavit filed on 21.04.2014 before the Assessing Officer. It was also mentioned that the statements u/s

21 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society 132(4) were given by the above people under duress. The complaint regarding the conduct of Investigation Wing of the Department were also made to the CBDT on 18.10.2010. The appellant society also initiated disciplinary action against the said three persons, namely, Shri Arvind Deshpande, Shri Sharad Bhosale and Dr. Janardan Garde for indulging in alleged illegal activities for collecting the capitation fees. The very fact that the Department had issued a prosecution notice u/s 277 to Shri Arvind Deshpande, Shri Sharad Bhosale and Dr. Janardan Garde goes to prove the fact that these persons had given false statements and, therefore, it is submitted that the statements of above three persons should be completely ignored. In the absence of evidentiary value of the statements from these three persons, there is no corroborative evidence to conclude that the appellant society had collected capitation fees. The appellant society also submitted that these three persons, namely, Shri Arvind Deshpande, Shri Sharad Bhosale and Dr. Janardan Garde are shifty witnesses, proved by the fact that the Department had issued a prosecution notice u/s 277 as they made false statements. Thus, it is contended that the Assessing Officer cannot rely on the statements of shifty witnesses in judicial

22 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society proceedings, once is false is always is false relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Amal Kumar Chakraborty vs. CIT, 207 ITR 376 (Cal. – HC). Thus, it was submitted that the statements of above said three persons have no evidentiary value in the present proceedings. In the absence of evidentiary value of the statements from these three persons, the loose papers found are merely dumb papers and dumb documents cannot form the basis for making the additions. It is further submitted that while interpreting the figures found or noted in the loose papers, the Assessing Officer decoded the figures, which is impermissible in law. In support of this fact, the appellant society relied on the following decisions :- (i) Amarnath Virendra Kumar – Delhi High Court dated 11.12.2014. (ii) D. S. Doors Pvt. Ltd. – Delhi ITAT, 43 CCH 261. (iii) Girish Chaudhary – Delhi High Court – 296 ITR 619. (iv) Balaji Educational and Charitable Public Trust – Madras High Court. (v) Common Cause Registered Society vs. UOI – Supreme Court. (B). Another contention raised by the appellant society is that the Assessing Officer had gathered evidence from the students/parents of the students by recording the statements u/s 131 of the Act and notices u/s 133(6) of the Act. These statements were never

23 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society produced to the appellant society whereas only in respect of one ex- students, namely, Ms. Mrinalini Patankar, the statement which is adverse to the assessee were furnished to the assessee which is against the appellant society, it shows that the Assessing Officer has indulged in cherry picky of the evidence, which is not permissible in law. Finally, it is submitted that during the course of search proceedings, the President of the appellant society, Shri Maruti N. Navale had categorically denied that the appellant society had been collecting the capitation fees or donations for admission of the students under the management quota. It is also contended that the Assessing Officer had chosen to make the addition on account of capitation fees without granting any opportunity to the appellant society to rebut the evidence gathered by the Assessing Officer. The ld. Counsel assailed the finding of the Assessing Officer as well as the ld. CIT(A) that the capitation fees so collected by the appellant society had been siphoned off by the President of the appellant society, namely, Shri Maruti N. Navale in the absence of evidence linking the assets found with Shri Maruti N. Navale and the alleged collection of capitation fees by the appellant society.

24 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society (C). As regards to the reliance placed by the Assessing Officer on the statement of one Shri Surendra Nagar alleged to be admission agent, it is submitted that the statement has no evidentiary value, inasmuch, as the Assessing Officer had not provided opportunity of cross-examination to the appellant society. Finally, it is submitted that there was no allegation that the appellant society had violated the provisions of the Maharashtra Educational Institution (Prohibition of Capitation Fees) Act, 1987. This itself is a testimony to the allegation made by the Assessing Officer. (D). Without prejudice to the above, it is submitted that if the statements of Shri Arvind Deshpande, Shri Sharad Bhosale and Dr. Janardan Garde recorded u/s 132(4) are to be believed, it would only mean that they collected the capitation fees for their personal enrichment. It is further fortified by fact that even the Central Government had been stepped into control the corruption in the private sector and the Lokpal and Lokayukta Act passed in the year 2013. In the said Act, the office bearers of NGO’s have been treated as public official for the purposes of the Act. As regard to the exemption u/s 11 of the Act, the ld. AR submitted that in a case addition on account of receipt of capitation fees is sustained, denial

25 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society of exemption u/s 11(2) be restricted to the addition on account of receipt of capitation fees and balance income should be considered as exempt relying on the following decisions :- (i) Sheth Mafatlal Trust, 249 ITR 533. (ii) Fr. Mullers Charitable Institutions, 363 ITR 230. (E). As regards to the allegation of violation of provisions of section 13(1)(c) by providing rent free accommodation to Shri Maruti N. Navale, it is submitted that the said Shri Maruti N. Navale had not been paid any remuneration by the appellant society for the following services rendered by him :- “a. Complete administration and supervision of the working of all the units though these were also headed by the Principals or Directors, b. To supervise the working of all these Principal / Directors to ensure that education is imparted in the most effective manner. His direct supervision over all these Principals /Directors results into vouching their working and desired result, c. Working diligently in obtaining approvals from the educational and government authorities for conducting the various courses, d. Representing for fixing the reasonable tuition fees by the Fee Fixation Committee appointed by the government, e. Entering into agreements wherever needed, f. Pursuing the legal matters before the education tribunals including High Court, Supreme Court etc. as and when needed. g. To invite tenders for construction of the various buildings making estimation of cost to be laid out, h. Negotiating and arranging the bank loans and signing the documents including documents for mortgaging the immovable properties as security for the loans obtained or to be obtained, and signing the loan documents, ensuring to the adherence of repayment of loans as scheduled etc,

26 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society i. Deciding purchases of lands, properties etc needed for the appellant and many other incidental jobs, j. Visiting other educational institutions, social bodies, etc and public at large and arranging the seminars, lectures, social gatherings, exhibitions, etc. incidental to educational activities, k. To sign and issue appointment letters, termination letters, promotion, demotion of employees as well as to suspend or to reinstate employees, l. Arrange funds required for incurring establishment expenses, capital expenses etc. m. To operate bank accounts of the Society and it’s institutions under his / her sole signature or jointly with Secretary or Vice President or any other person authorized by the Managing Council, n. Mr. M. N. Navale and his wife Mrs. Sunanda Navale have stood as guarantor for the loans obtained from various banks in their individual capacities for the benefits of the appellant.” (F). Thus, it was contended that providing rent free accommodation by any standard cannot be considered as undue benefit passed on to Shri Maruti N. Navale. In support of this, the ld. AR relied upon the following decisions :- (i) NH Kapadia Education Trust, 136 ITD 111. (ii) 21st Society of Immaculate Conception, 241 ITR 193. (iii) Foundation for Social Care, 37 taxmann.com 389. (iv) Manockjee Cowasjee Petit Charities, 21 taxmann.com 456. Thus, it is submitted that there is no violation of section 13(1)(c) of the Act on account of rent free accommodation provided to Shri Maruti N. Navale alleged by the Assessing Officer.

27 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society As regards to the violation of provisions of section 13(1)(c) of the Act on account of salary paid to Shri U.Y. Pawar, who was admittedly working for a company like JSAPL as the amount of salary was reimbursed to the appellant society violation had been cured. (G). As regards to the disallowance of prior period expenses, the ld. AR submits that the prior period expenses had been disallowed by the Assessing Officer without giving an opportunity to the assessee. Thus, he prayed that no disallowance for prior period expenses can be made. 21. On the other hand, ld. CIT-DR vehemently opposed the submissions by filling the written submissions. The substance of the arguments of the ld. CIT-DR is that : I. There is a concrete evidence brought on record by the Assessing Officer suggesting that the appellant society had been collecting the capitation fees for admission of the students under the management quota in various institutions run by the appellant society. The evidence brought on record by the Assessing Officer is the form of the loose sheets found as result of search and seizure action, which are confronted to

28 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society the persons from whose custody such documents/papers were found. II. During the course of search operations, when the loos sheets were confronted with the concerned persons, they confirmed on oath u/s 132(4) of the Act and also decoded the contents found on the loose sheets/chits. They have also admitted to have made the notings. The statements recorded u/s 132(4) from these people like, Shri Arvind Deshpande, Shri Sharad Bhosale and Dr. Janardan Garde clearly establishes the factum of the collection of the capitation fees by the appellant society. III. The Assessing Officer also brought corroborative evidence in the form of recommendation letters urging concession of donations/capitation fees, statement recorded from the admission agent, statement recorded from the parents of the students and SMS messages exchange between the admission agent and Shri Arvind Deshpande, Shri Sharad Bhosale and Dr. Janardan Garde. IV. The statement recorded from the students and the parents of the students u/s 131 and u/s 133(6) of the Act were not

29 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society furnished to the appellant society is of no consequence, inasmuch, as there is no evidentiary value that can be attached to the statements recorded from the students and their parents, inasmuch, as the students greatly dependent upon the appellant society for internal evaluation, class progression etc. and appearing on account of fear of adverse consequence, no adverse testimony was given. However, it is only one student, namely, Ms. Mrinalini Patankar had admitted the payment of capitation fees in cash. However, the said Ms. Mrinalini Patankar and her father Shri Sudhir Patankar had expressed their insecurity for their lives through emails sent by them to the Assessing Officer on 26.03.2016. It is submitted that the Assessing Officer’s action of not considering the statements recorded from the students and their parents should be considered in the backdrop of the fact that the students and their parents, who had paid the capitation fees for participated in this mutually collusive transaction of payment of capitation fees. V. The evidence brought on record by the Assessing Officer clearly brings out and substantiate role played by (a) Shri

30 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society Maruti N. Navale, Founder and Presidnet of the appellant society, (b) Shri Arvind Deshpande, Director and Principal, (c) Dr. Janardan Garde, Professor and HOD, Dental College and (d) Shri Sharad Bhosale, Accounts Officer. Even the statements recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act had clearly confirmed the factum of receipt of capitation fees by the appellant society. VI. The statements which are in the form of retraction are bald and given afterthought and cannot take way the evidentiary value of the statement given u/s 132(4) of the Act. Specially, in the light of the fact that even in the post-search proceedings, veracity of statement had been confirmed under the statement given u/s 131(1) of the Act. The ld. CIT-DR also relied upon the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Bannalal Jat Construction (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT, 106 taxmann.com 128 (SC) wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that once the statements are recorded on oath and duly signed, it has a great evidentiary value and retraction after sufficient long gap loose its significance and is an afterthought.

31 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society VII. In counter to the submissions of ld. AR that no reliance can be placed upon the shifty witnesses. The ld. CIT-DR contends that when no credence was given to the retraction statement then the evidentiary value of the statement recorded u/s 132(4) remain intact. VIII. Placing reliance on the provisions of section 132(4) of the Act submits that the loose documents/sheets found in the premises of the appellant society belongs to the appellant society and the statements recorded from the persons in whose custody the documents are found clearly confirmed that the notings were made in the loose sheets in the handwriting of the said three persons placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court M. Vivek vs. DCIT, 121 taxmann.com 366 (Madras) wherein, the Hon’ble High Court held that loose sheets picked up during search and seizure operations u/s 132 also falls within the definition of documents and it has got evidentiary value. IX. Rebutting the argument of the ld. AR that the loose sheets are simple dumb, ld. CIT-DR submits that the notings on the loose sheets were clearly in handwriting and with

32 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society signature of persons involved in admission process, namely, Shri Arvind Deshpande, Shri Sharad Bhosale and Dr. Janardan Garde. During the course of recording statements u/s 132(4), the said three persons had categorically confirmed the contents of the notings and also confirmed the notings were made in handwriting of said three persons. It is also undisputed position that these students, in-fact, were actually admitted in management quota of institutions and, therefore, thus it was contended that the loose sheets cannot be termed as “dumb documents”. X. As regards to the submissions of ld. AR that if at all capitation fees is collected, it was for the personal enrichment of the said three persons, namely, Shri Arvind Deshpande, Shri Sharad Bhosale and Dr. Janardan Garde cannot be accepted for the reason that no criminal proceedings were initiated against the said three persons even after the management had come to know of such practice. XI. As regards t the role of Shri Maruti N. Navale, the Founder and President of the appellant society, the ld. CIT- DR drawing our attention to the statements given by Dr.

33 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society Janardan Garde u/s 132(4) of the Act wherein, in reply to question no.6, he categorically stated that the criteria for accepting the capitation fees was set by Shri Maruti N. Navale. The ld. CIT-DR, in view of the following facts :- i) Cash of Rs.38,12,595/- was found at the residential premises of Sh.M.N.Navale out of which an amount of Rs.35 lakhs was seized which couldn’t be explained satisfactorily by the Sh.M.N.Navale. Out of Rs.38,12,595/- an amount of Rs.3419500/- was found in the bedroom of Sh.Rohit Navale who is son of Sh.M.N.Navale and also vice-president of STES. The most important point to ponder is, out of this Rs.3419500/- an amount of Rs. 1727800/- was found kept in a bag having details of amount of cash received from various students of different colleges and campus of STES. There is no adequate justification given by the appellant society in this regard (refer paper book-2 page 297). ii) Excess gold of 6.68 Kg and diamond of 685 Cts were found for which no bills and invoices in support were produced. iii) During the search action numerous instances wherein involvement of Sh.M.N.Navale instructing acceptance or refund of capitation fee/donation were found. iv) Sh.Sharad Bhosale, account officer used to receive direct instructions from Sh.M.N.Navale on request letters/ recommendation letters/ chits/ application forms/ notepad etc. Page 10 of bundle no.1 found from the society office clearly speaks of offering the concession of 10% on the donation of Rs.12 lakhs for the BDS seat. Another page from the same bundle speaks of 50% concession in capitation fee. There are

34 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society numerous instances wherein Sh.M.N.Navale has instructed Sh.Bhosale with remark such as “collect fees only” and ‘'fees only”. The very remark is self explanatory suggesting that Sh.Bhosale is supposed to collect something other than fees unless instructed otherwise. It is nobody’s guess as to what that ‘something’ must be except for capitation fee/donation. v) Dr.Janardan Garde in his statement u/s 132(4) of the IT act in response to question no.6 has categorically stated that the criteria for accepting capitation fee for MQ/IQ seats is by and large set by our President & founder secretary, Sh.M.N.Navale from year to year and he in his capacity as professor and Head, merely communicates the said criteria i.e. the quantum of donation/ capitation fees to be submitted by the students for MQ seats. Interestingly, in his response to question no.7, Sh.Garade gives name-wise list of students and the capitation fees paid by the students. Sh.Garade has even gone to the extent of giving even the minute details of pending amount of Rs.12 Lakhs in case of one of the students, namely Sh.Dinesh Nikhate. While giving all his responses Sh.Garade has clearly underlined the significance and role of Sh.M.N.Navale. (paperbook-lll page no.554 - 555) vi) Similarly in the statement of Sh.Deshpande, he has categorically confirmed at oath that Sh.M.N.Navale is final authority in deciding upon the admission under MQ/IQ. vii) Noting made by Sh.M.N.Navale on the rate-list of PG admission of dental college, especially in the case of student Sh.Viral Gada earmarking two installment of Rs.37 lakhs and Rs.10 lakhs each with date and signature is more than speaking evidence of Sh.M.N.Navale’s involvement in finalizing the quantum of capitation fee and getting it executed through accountant.

35 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society viii) There are numerous incidents wherein Sh.M.N.Navale has received recommendation letters from MLA, MP, ministers and eminent personalities seeking concession in donation to be paid. Many such letters were seized during search action which have been processed further by Sh.M.N.Navale by passing on due instruction to Sh.Bhosale.” XII. The ld. CIT-DR submits that Mr. M.N. Navale is key person behind the scheme of collection of capitation fees and he is final authority in deciding the quantum/concession for the capitation fees. He also submits that the statement given by Shri Surendra Nagar who is alleged to be admission agent, whose statement recorded u/s 132(4) on 06.08.2013 also supports the findings of the Assessing Officer that the appellant society had been collecting capitation fees from the students. XIII. As regards to the quantification of capitation fees, ld. CIT-DR submits that during the course of remand proceedings before the ld. CIT(A), the appellant society itself had worked out the capitation fees based on the evidence unearthed as result of search and seizure action and the Assessing Officer had not made any resort to the extrapolation.

36 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society XIV. As regards to the denial of exemption u/s 11 of the Act, ld. CIT-DR submits that since the appellant society had been formed only with an object of collecting the capitation fees for personal enrichment of the Founder and President of the appellant society, Shri Maruti N. Navale, it cannot be said that the object of the appellant society is charitable and, therefore, the Assessing Officer rightly denied the exemption u/s 11 of the Act. XV. As regards to the rent free accommodation u/s 13(2)(b) of the act, the ld. CIT-DR submitted that once there is a violation u/s 13(1)(c) r.w.s. 13(2)(b), the benefit of section 11 should be taken away. XVI. As regard to the salary paid to Shri U.Y. Pawar, ld. CIT-DR submitted that the action of recovery was initiated only after search action and the ld. CIT(A) rightly confirmed the addition. XVII. As regards to the prior period expenses, ld. CIT- DR submitted that ld. CIT(A) rightly confirmed the disallowed as the appellant society had not furnished anything before the

37 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society Assessing Officer as well as the ld. CIT(A) to justify the claim. 22. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The ground no.1 to 7 challenges the correctness of findings of the lower authorities in holding that the appellant society had been indulged in collecting the capitation fees from the students for their admission in various courses under the management quota in the institutions run by the appellant society. There was a search and seizure action that took place in the premises of the appellant society on 06.08.2013. During the course of search and seizure operations, the Investigation Wing of the Department unearthed certain loose sheets. The details of which were set out by the Assessing Officer at page no.2 of the assessment order. On examination of these loose sheets, the Assessing Officer found out that the appellant society had been indulging in the collection of the capitation fees from the students for admission under the management quota in various courses in the institutions run by the appellant society. The case setup by the Assessing Officer against the appellant society is that Shri Maruti N. Navale, the President of the appellant society decides the broad framework and Shri Arvind

38 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society Deshpande, Principal and Director of the appellant society decides the rate of donations for a particular course after negotiation with the admission seekers. Once the rate of donation is finalized, the details of student’s name, courses, college and the amount of capitation fees that should be collected from such students is communicated to Shri Sharad Bhosale, who is Accounts Officer of the appellant society. After completion of the negotiation, these students are directed to meet Shri Sharad Bhosale for depositing the capitation fees in cash. In the meantime, Shri Sharad Bhosale was informed about by internal system i.e. either oral or through notings in the chits/papers of the amount to be collected from the students. On receipt of the capitation fees, Shri Sharad Bhosale makes notings of the donation receipt on the reverse of the application form. The Assessing Officer also placed heavy reliance on the application forms and loose sheets which are impounded as extracted in the assessment order to conclude that the appellant is engaged in the collection of capitation fees. The Assessing Officer also relied on the statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act from Shri Arvind Deshpande, Shri Sharad Bhosale, Dr. Janardan Garde and Shri Maruti N. Navale wherein, in the statements recorded on

39 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society 06.08.2013, Shri Arvind Deshpande was confronted with the loose sheets found in bundle no.2 at the society office, accepted that the notings made in the chit no.3 to 11 are in his own handwriting and the notings are pertained to the receipt of the capitation fees received from students at the time of admission into the courses under the management quota. He also decoded the figures appearing in the loose sheets to mean that the figure of 3 is Rs.3,00,000/- to be collected from the students. Likewise, the said persons explained the contents of all the balance 10 chits and the scanned images of loose sheets also reproduced at page no.8 of the assessment order. Similarly, in the statement recorded from Shri Sharad Bhosale u/s 132(4), he confirmed in answer to query no.46 that he had received the amounts as per instruction of Shri Arvind Deshpande from the students. He also confirmed that the figures finding place in the notings represents in Rupees ‘Lacs’, no receipts were issued as per direction of Shri Arvind Deshpande. The statement recorded are extracted by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order and the scanned images of the loose sheets are also reproduced in the assessment order vide page no.8 and 9. The statement was recorded from Dr. Janardan Garde u/s 132(4) on

40 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society 06.08.2013, he had confirmed in reply to question no.10 that the students approached him for admission under the management quota for admission in various courses, after finalizing the amount of capitation fees to be paid in cash, the candidates were directed by him to go to society office to meet either Shri Arvind Deshpande or Shri Sharad Bhosale for depositing the capitation fees. He further confirmed that Shri Sharad Bhosale collected the capitation fees in cash against which no receipt was issued. He also confirmed that SMS messages received on Mobile No.9822001404 are only regarding the receipt of the capitation fees. In addition to above, the Assessing Officer also brought on record corroborative evidence in the form of evidence showing refund of the capitation fees upon cancellation of admission under the management quota and recommendation letters from various important VIPs urging waiver/concession in donation of capitation fees and also exchanges digital backup of Mobile Phone’s SMS from Dr. Janardan Garde and Shri Arvind Deshpande and also statement recorded from the admission agent, namely, Shri Surendra Nagar who had admitted in the statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act that he earned commission income for admission under the management quota and

41 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society by paying the capitation fees. These notings on the loose sheets/papers clearly indicates that the appellant society had been indulging in the collection of capitation fees for admission of the students under the management quota. The main contention of the appellant society is that the statements recorded from three persons u/s 132(4) have no evidentiary value in view of the fact that the said statements were retracted by the said people by filing the affidavit dated 16.04.2014 filed before the Assessing Officer on 21.04.2014 stating that the answers given in response to query at the time of recording the statements u/s 132(4) on 07.08.2013, 19.08.2013, 21.08.2013 and 01.11.2013 are incorrect, insofar as, their statements are adverse to the appellant society. The said statements of retraction were enclosed at page no.17 to 48 of the Paper Book. 23. In the backdrop of these facts, the issue that is required to be adjudicated by us is whether or not any evidentiary value can be attached to statements recorded u/s 132(4) from above said three persons. 24. We have carefully gone through the notings on the loose sheets which are reproduced in the assessment order as well as we have also gone through the statements recorded from 3 people like

42 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society Shri Arvind Deshpande, Shri Sharad Bhosale and Dr. Janardan Garde filed at page no.139 to 288 of the Paper Book. The notings in loose papers are explained by said three people in the statements recorded u/s 132(4), these three people have confirmed that they had collected the capitation fees from the students in cash at the time of admission in various courses under the management quota. The amount of capitation fees was decided either by Shri Arvind Deshpande or by Dr. Janardan Garde under over all framework given by the Founder and President of the appellant society, namely, Shri Maruti N. Navale. The said three persons have categorically stated in answers to question recorded at the time of statements recorded u/s 132(4) that the students approaches them for admission into various courses under the management quota and they negotiate with the students or their parents of the capitation fees and the students were directed to meet Shri Sharad Bhosale to deposit the capitation fees against which no receipt was issued. Even that Shri Sharad Bhosale also categorically stated in the statement recorded u/s 132(4) that as per instructions of Shri Arvind Deshpade, the amount of capitation fees had been collected from the students in cash. They have also decoded the figures found in the notings by

43 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society saying that the figures represent ‘Rupees in Lacs’ and also notings are made in their handwritings. Thus, contents of the loose sheets clearly stood explained. There is no ambiguity as to the contents of the notings found in the loose sheets, as the author of the loose sheets have admitted the contents found in the loose sheets and also decoded the figures found in the loose sheets. In the circumstances, the contention that the loose sheets are merely the dumb documents have no evidentiary value cannot be accepted. Even the loose sheets also come within the ambit of the documents as defined u/s 292C of the Income Tax Act. The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of M. Vivek vs. DCIT, 432 ITR 53 following its earlier decision in the case of CIT v. T. Rangroopchand Chardia, 241 Taxman 21 held as follows vide para 34 of the judgement :- “34. With regard to the evidentiary value of loose sheets is concerned, section 132(4) of the Income-tax Act, permits the authorised officer to seize books of accounts and other documents. The judgment relied upon by the learned Counsel for the petitioner in the case of V.C. Shukla case (supra), and others reported in 1998 (3) SCC 410, has no bearing for the case on hand, as that case was dealing with a criminal proceeding involving criminal conspiracy under section 120-B of IPC and further, it was dealing with "books of accounts". Whereas, in the case on hand, it is an income tax proceeding before a quasijudicial authority. A Division Bench of the Madras High Court, in the case of Rangroopchand Chordia (supra), relied upon by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent, while dealing with section 132 of the Income-tax Act, similar to the case on hand, has held that loose sheets picked up during search under section 132 of the Income-tax Act, falls within the definition of "document", mentioned in section 132(4) of the

44 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society Income Tax Act and therefore, it has got evidentiary value. Therefore, the contention raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that loose sheets seized during the search under section 132 of the Income- tax Act does not have any evidentiary value, is rejected by this Court.” 25. Therefore, the contention of the appellant that the loose sheets are merely dumb documents cannot be accepted in view of the provisions of section 292C of the Act and the legal position as enunciated by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case (supra). From reading of the above para of the judgement in the case of M. Vivek (supra), it would be clear that the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of V. C. Shukla reported in 1998 3 SCC 410 have no application in the case of proceedings under Income Tax Act. Thus, the reliance placed by the ld. Counsel on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the V. C. Shukla (supra) does not come to the rescue of the appellant herein. 26. It is settled position of law that the admission is an extremely important piece of evidence but it cannot be said that it is conclusive. It is open to the assessee who made the admission to show that it is incorrect as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pullangode Rubber Produce Company Ltd. vs. State of Kerala & Another, 91 ITR 0018 (SC). In other words, an admission

45 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society is the best evidence that an opposing party rely upon and though not conclusive, is a decisive of matter, unless successfully withdrawn of proved erroneous. An admission, if clearly and unequivocally made, is the best evidence against the party making it and though not conclusive, shifts the onus on the maker on the principle that “what a party himself admits to be true may reasonably be presumed to be so and until the presumption was rebutted the fact admitted must be taken to be established” [Thiru John v. Returning Officer, AIR 1977 SC 1726-27]. In the light of this above legal position, the statement voluntarily made by the assessee could form the basis of assessment. 27. Now, we shall deal with the contention made on behalf of the appellant society that no evidentiary value can be attached to the statements made by said three persons u/s 132(4) of the Act in view of the affidavits filed on 21.04.2014 before the Assessing Officer by the said three persons. The said affidavits are claimed to be retraction statements from the said three persons. Now the question that arises for consideration is under what circumstances, the retraction statement can be given the credence. The Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Bannalal Jat Construction (P)

46 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society Ltd. vs. ACIT, 106 taxmann.com 128 after referring to the series of decisions laid down that (i) the retraction should be made as soon as possible and immediately after statement has been recorded (ii) the retraction should be supported by duly sworn affidavit and statement through convincing evidence the asssesee could demonstrate that the earlier statement was incorrect and (ii) whenever pleadings were made that to effect that the earlier statements was recorded under pressure, coercion or compulsion by filing a complaint to higher officials. This position was reiterated in catena of decisions by the various High Courts in the case of CIT vs. Lekh Raj Dhunna, 344 ITR 352 (P&H), Bachittar Singh vs. CIT, 328 ITR 400 (P&H), Rameshchandra & Co. vs. CIT, 168 ITR 375 (Bom.), Dr. S.C. Gupta vs. CIT, 248 ITR 782 (All.), CIT vs. Hotel Meriya, 332 ITR 537 (Kerala), CIT vs. O. Abdul Razak, 350 ITR 71 (Kerala). 28. In the present case, on careful examination of the so called retractment statements filed in the form of affidavits dated 16.04.2014 notarized on 19.04.2014, we find that all these affidavits are stereo typed, identically worded stating that the statement made u/s 132(4) to the effect that the receipt of capitation fees are not

47 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society correct as the statements are given under tremendous pressure as well as torture at the time of the statement were recorded. These retraction statements were made after a gap of 7 months. No evidence of coercion, compulsion and pressure was led on record. Thus, it is nothing, but a bald statement. Further, the said three persons are employees of the appellant society working under direct supervision, control, direction of the Founder and President of the appellant society, namely, Shri Maruti N. Navale. In view of these facts, the retraction statements can be said to be self-serving and no credence can be given and the retraction statements looses significance and an afterthought. Therefore, the statement recorded u/s 132(4) cannot be discarded merely because the retractment statements were filed. The statements u/s 132(4) are true and correct and brings out the correct picture as at that time the maker of the statement is uninfluenced by external agencies and it is the statements are recorded in the presence of the independent witnesses. Therefore, in our considered opinion, the so-called retraction statements are simple a self-serving statements without any material and cannot override the statements recorded u/s 132(4) of the Income Tax Act. The reliance placed by the ld. Counsel on

48 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sunil Agarwal, 64 taxmann.com 107 cannot come to the rescue of the appellant herein for the reason that in the said case the assesse apart retracting the statement also discharged the onus of proving the statement is incorrect through cogent material. In this connection, we rely upon the decision of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Shri Roshan Lal Sancheti in Income Tax Appeal No.47/2018 dated 30.10.2018 wherein, the Hon’ble High Court after referring to the several decisions held as follows :- “This court in CIT, Bikaner Vs. Ravi Mathur, supra, which judgment has been relied by the ITAT in the present case, after considering catena of previous decisions, held that the statements recorded under Section 132(4) of the IT Act have great evidentiary value and they cannot be discarded summarily and cryptic manner, by simply observing that the assessee retracted from his statement. One has to come to a definite finding as to the manner in which the retraction takes place. Such retraction should be made as soon as possible and immediately after such statement has been recorded by filing a complaint to the higher officials or otherwise brought to the notice of the higher officials by way of duly sworn affidavit or statement supported by convincing evidence, stating that the earlier statement was recorded under pressure, coercion or compulsion. We deem it appropriate to reproduce para 15 of the said judgment, which reads thus, “15. In our view, the statements recorded under Section 132(4) have great evidentiary value and it cannot be discarded as in the instant case ITA No.720/JP/2017 M/s Bannalal Jat Construction Pvt. Ltd., Bhilwara vs. ACIT, Central Circle-Ajmer by the Tribunal in a summary or in a cryptic manner. Statements recorded under Section 132(4) cannot be discarded by simply observing that the assessee retracted the statements. One has to

49 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society come to a definite finding as to the manner in which retraction takes place. On perusal of the facts noticed hereinbefore, we have noticed that while the statements were recorded at the time of search on 9.11.1995 and onwards but retraction, is almost after an year and that too when the assessment proceedings were being taken up in November 1996. We may observe that retraction should be made as soon as possible and immediately after such a statement has been recorded, either by filing a complaint to the higher officials or otherwise brought to the notice of the higher officials, either by way of a duly sworn affidavit or statements supported by convincing evidence through which an assessee could demonstrate that the statements initially recorded were under pressure/coercion and factually incorrect. In our view, retraction after a sufficient long gap or point of time, as in the instant case, loses its significance and is an afterthought. Once statements have been recorded on oath, duly signed, it has a great evidentiary value and it is normally presumed that whatever stated at the time of recording of statements under Section 132(4), are true and correct and brings out the correct picture, as by that time the assessee is uninfluenced by external agencies. Thus, whenever an assessee pleads that the statements have been obtained forcefully/by coercion/undue influence without material/contrary to the material, then it should be supported by strong evidence which we have observed hereinbefore. Once a statement is recorded under Section 132(4), such a statement can be used as a strong evidence against the assessee in assessing the income, the burden lies on the assessee to establish that the admission made in the statements are incorrect/wrong and that burden has to be discharged by an assessee at the earliest point of time and in the instant case we notice that the AO in the Assessment Order observes:- "Regarding the amount of Rs. 44.285 lakhs, it is now contended that the statement u/s 132(4) was not correct and these amounts are in ITA No.720/JP/2017 M/s Bannalal Jat Construction Pvt. Ltd., Bhilwara vs. ACIT, Central Circle-Ajmer thousands, not lakhs i.e. it is now attempted to retract from the statements made at the time of S & S operations." Therefore, what we gather from the Assessment Order and on perusal of the above finding that the retraction was at the stage when the assessment proceedings were being finalized i.e. almost after a gap of more than an year. Such a so-called retraction in

50 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society our view is no retraction in law and is simply a self-serving statement without any material.” The judgment of the Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Sunil Aggarwal, supra, relied on by the assessee does not in any manner extend any assistance to him because that was a case in which the court found that the assessee, apart from retracting the statement, also discharged the onus on him through cogent material to rebut the presumption that stood attracted in view of the statement made under Section 132(4) of the IT Act with reference to the entries in the books of accounts of the sales made during the year and the stock position. Similar was the position in Kailashben Manharlal Chokshi Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax – (2008) 174 Taxman 466 (Gujarat), wherein the High Court of Gujarat found that the assessee gave proper evidence in support of his retraction. The High Court of Madras in M. Narayanan and Bros. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, supra, held that when assessee had explained his statement as not correct in context of materials produced, no amount could be added to his income on the basis of his statement. Similarly, what has been held by the High Court of Bombay in Commissioner of Income- tax, Central- II, Mumbai Vs. Omprakash K. Jain – (2009)178 Taxman 179 (Bombay) was that the assessing officer, while considering whether retraction was under duress or coercion, had also to consider genuineness of documents produced before him. The Punjab and Haryana High Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. Lekh Raj Dhunna, taking note of the fact that the assessee had made a statement under Section 132(4) of the IT Act whereby a surrender of Rs.2 lakh was made and further that the assessee had admitted that he had earned commission from a party, which was not disclosed in the return filed by him and certain documents were seized which bore the signature of the assessee, held in para 16 of the report as under:- “16. Thus, in view of sub-sections (4) and (4A) of Section 132 of the Act, the Assessing Officer was justified in drawing presumption against the assessee and had made addition of Rs.9 lakhs in his income under Section 68 of the Act. The onus was upon the assessee to have produced cogent material to rebut the aforesaid presumption which he had failed to displace. The assessee retracted from the said statement, vide letters dated November 24, 1998, and March 11, 1999, during the course of assessment proceedings. However, no value could be attached thereto in the present case. In case the statement which was made by the assessee at the time of search and seizure was under pressure or due to coercion, the assessee could have retracted from the same at the earliest. No plausible explanation has been

51 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society furnished as to why the said statement could not be withdrawn earlier. In such a situation, the authenticity of the statement by virtue of which surrender had been made at the time of search cannot be held to be bad. The Tribunal, thus, erred in concluding otherwise. The Tribunal, therefore, was not justified in reversing the order of the Assessing Officer which was affirmed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) also.” The Punjab and Haryana High Court in Bachittar Singh Vs, Commissioner of Income-Tax, supra, in para 7 of the report, held as under:- “7. It is not disputed that the statement was made by the assessee at the time of survey, which was retracted on May 28, 2003, and he did not take any further action for a period of more than two months. In such circumstances, the view taken by the Tribunal that retraction from the earlier statement was not permissible, is definitely a possible view. The mere fact that some entries were made in a diary could not be held to be sufficient and conclusive to hold that the statement earlier made was false. The assessee failed to produce books of account which may have been maintained during regular course of business or any other authentic contemporaneous evidence of agricultural income. In the circumstances, the statement of the assessee could certainly be acted upon.” The High Court of Kerala in The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. O. Abdul Razak, supra, in para nos.8, 9 and 10 of the report, held as under:- “8. It cannot be doubted for a moment that the burden of proving the undisclosed income is squarely on the shoulders of the department. Acquisition of properties by the assessee are proved with the documents seized in search. Since under statement of consideration in documents is the usual practise the officer questioned the assessee on payments made over and above the amounts stated in the documents. Assessee gave sworn statement honestly disclosing the actual amounts paid. The question now to be considered is whether the sworn statement constitutes evidence of undisclosed income and if so whether it is evidence collected by the department. In our view the burden of proof is discharged by the department when they persuaded the assessee to state details of undisclosed income, which the assessee disclosed in his sworn statement, on being confronted with the title deeds seized in search.

52 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society 9. Section 132 of the Income tax Act deals with search and seizure and sub-Section (4) of Section 132 empowers the authorised officer during the course of the search and seizure to examine on oath any person who is found to be in possession or control of any books of account, documents, money or valuable articles or things etc. and record a statement made by such person which can be used in evidence in any proceedings under the Income Tax Act. The explanation appended to Clause (4) also makes it clear that such examination can be in respect of any matters relevant for the purpose of any investigation and need not be confined to matters pertaining to the material found as a result of the search. A plain reading of Section 132(4) would clearly show that what was intended by empowering an officer conducting the search to take a statement on oath was to record evidence as contemplated in any adjudication especially since Section 131 confers on all officers empowered therein with the same powers as vested in a court under the Code of Criminal Procedure, for the purpose of the Income Tax Act. 10. A Division Bench of this Court in C.I.T. v. Hotel Meriya, (2011) 332 ITR 537 considered the scope of a statement recorded under Section 132(4) and found that such statement recorded by the officer as well as the documents seized would come within the purview of evidence under Section 158(BB) of the Income-tax Act read with Section 3 of the Evidence Act and Section 131 of the Income Tax Act. Based on the above finding, it was also held that such evidence would be admissible for the purpose of block assessments too. The explanation to Section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act was also noticed by the Division Bench to further emphasise that the evidence so collected would be relevant in all purposes connected with any proceedings of the Income Tax Act.” The Allahabad High Court in Dr. S.C. Gupta Vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax, supra, in para 7 of the report, held as under:- “7. As regards the assessee’s contention that the statement having been retracted the Assessing Officer should have independently come to a conclusion that there was additional income as sought to be assessed and that there was no material to support that there was such income, this contention in our view is not correct. As held by the Supreme Court in Pullan-gode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala, (1973) 91 ITR 18 an admission is an extremely important piece of evidence though it is not conclusive. Therefore, a statement made voluntarily by the assessee could form the basis of assessment. The mere fact that

53 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society the assessee retracted the statement could not make the statement unacceptable. The burden lay on the assessee to establish that the admission made in the statement at the time of survey was wrong and in fact there was no additional income. This burden does not even seem to have been attempted to be discharged. Similarly, P.K. Palwankar v. CGT, [1979] 117 ITR 768 (MP) and CIT v. Mrs. Doris S. Luiz, [1974] 96 ITR 646 (Ker) on which also learned counsel for the assessee placed reliance are of no help to the assessee. The Tribunal’s order is concluded by findings of fact and in our view no question of law arises. The applications are, accordingly, rejected.” All the aforementioned judgments were considered by this Court in M/s. Bannalal Jat Constructions Pvt. Ltd. (supra) wherein also the assessee retracted from his statement initially given under Section 132(4) of the Act on 10.10.12014 followed by confirmation statement under Section 131 on 04.12.2014 and made the following observations: “Reverting back to the present case, the ITAT, on the basis of such statement of Shri Bannalal Jat, concluded that he was managing his business affairs of both his proprietary concern as well as appellant-company from his residence and that in the absence of individual cash-book of respective concerns and other details maintained by him, it is not possible to identify whether the cash so found belongs to the proprietary concern or to the assessee company. Subsequently, when the statement under Section 132(4) of the IT Act was recorded on 10.10.2014, which was concluded at his residence, Shri Bannalal Jat categorically admitted that the cash amount of Rs.1,21,43,210/- belonged to his company M/s. Bannalal Jat Construction Private Limited and the same was its undisclosed income. Thereafter another statement under Section 132(4) of the IT Act was recorded at his business premises on 11.10.2014. In reply to question No. 8, he was asked to explain the source of cash amounting to Rs.3,380/- found at his office and Rs.1,21,43,210/- found at his residence, he submitted regarding the amount of Rs.1,21,43,210/- found at his residence that he was unable to give any explanation and admitted that he was in the business of civil construction and in such business, various expenses have been inflated and shown in the books of accounts, and that the income so generated on account of such inflation in expenses is represented in the form of cash was found at his residence. This undisclosed income belonged to his company M/s Bannalal Jat Construction Pvt. Ltd. In response to question no.11 wherein he was asked to provide any other explanation which he wishes to provide, he submitted that pursuant to search operations where various

54 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society documents, loose papers, entries, cash, investment, advances and individual expenditure details have been found and taking all that into consideration, he surrendered Rs.4,01,43,210/- as his undisclosed income. He also categorically stated that the said disclosure is in the hands of M/s Bannalal Jat Construction Private Limited in respect of unexplained cash amounting to Rs.1,21,43,210/- and Rs.2,50,00,000 and Rs.30,00,000/- totalling to Rs.2,80,00,000 in his individual capacity.” In view of the law discussed above, it must be held that statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act and later confirmed in statement recorded under Section 131 of the Act, cannot be discarded simply by observing that the assessee has retracted the same because such retraction ought to have been generally made within reasonable time or by filing complaint to superior authorities or otherwise brought to notice of the higher officials by filing duly sworn affidavit or statement supported by convincing evidence. Such a statement when recorded at two stages cannot be discarded summarily in cryptic manner by observing that the assessee in a belatedly filed affidavit has retracted from his statement. Such retraction is required to be made as soon as possible or immediately after the statement of the assessee was recorded. Duration of time when such retraction is made assumes significance and in the present case retraction has been made by the assessee after almost eight months to be precise, 237 days.” The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of A.J. Ramesh Kumar vs. DCIT, 441 ITR 495 after referring to the judgements of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala, 91 ITR 18 and Bannalal Jat Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT, 413 ITR 322, the legal position in relation to the statement u/s 132(4) of the Act was set out as under : “a. An admission is an extremely important piece of evidence though it is not conclusive. b. A statement made voluntarily by the appellant could form the basis of assessment.

55 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society c. The mere fact that the appellant retracted the statement could not make the statement unacceptable. d. The burden lay on the appellant to show that the admission made by him in the statement earlier at the time of survey was wrong. Such retraction, however, should be supported by a strong evidence stating that the earlier statement was recorded under duress and coercion, and this has to have certain definite evidence to come to the conclusion 11/15 that indicating that there was an element of compulsion for appellant to make such statement. e. However, a bald assertion to this effect at much belated stage cannot be accepted. Applying the aforesaid legal proposition herein, we are of the opinion that once a statement is recorded, it is open to the assessing officer to rely and proceed on the basis that such statement is correct and represents the true state of affairs and the burden is on the deponent to demonstrate by letting cogent, convincing and material evidence that the statement was incorrect. Therefore, the statement made under Section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has a strong evidentiary value and is binding on a person, who makes it.” 29. Applying the above legal principle to the facts of the present case, we have no hesitation to hold that the so called retraction statements cannot be given any credence, on the other hand, the statements given by three persons named above u/s 132(4) of the I.T. Act carries more evidentiary value and cannot be discarded. 30. Further, the Assessing Officer also brought corroborative evidence in the form of the evidence showing refund of capitation fees, recommendation letters given by VIPs of the locality seeking waiver/reduction in the capitation fees/donations, exchange the SMS messages between Shri Arvind Deshpande and Shri Sharad

56 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society Bhosale and Dr. Janardan Garde and admission agent, Shri Surendra Nagar. This corroborative evidence remains uncontroverted by the appellant society. Thus, there is a conclusive evidence brought on record by the Assessing Officer to hold that the appellant had been indulging in collection of capitation fees from the students at the time of admission in various courses under the management quota. 31. The contention raised on behalf of the appellant that the addition on account of capitation fees cannot be sustained for the reason of the failure of the Assessing Officer to consider the statement recorded from the students and their parents u/s 131 or 133(6), even assuming for a moment that the students and their parents have denied having paid any capitation fees, no credence can be given to their testimony as the students and their parents are complementary and supplementary to the appellant society as they are undergoing studies in the institution run by the appellant society and any adverse testimony against the appellant society would also result in adverse consequences to them under the provisions of the Income Tax Act. Thus, the testimony by students and their parents is only self-serving, hence no credence can be given.

57 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society 32. It is settled position of law that the amount of capitation fees received over and above the prescribed under the provisions of the Maharashtra Educational Institution (Prohibition of Capitation Fees) Act, 1987 is not eligible for exemption u/s 11 as the practice of collection of capitation fees is contrary to the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Islamic Academy Of Education And Another vs. State Of Karnataka And Others, 6 SCC 697 (2003) and also against public policy and the contrary to the provisions Maharashtra Educational Institution (Prohibition of Capitation Fees) Act, 1987. Thus, the appellant is not eligible for exemption of income of capitation fees received outside books of accounts u/s 11 and the Assessing Officer had rightly brought to tax. Accordingly, the ground appeal no.1 to 7 stands dismissed. 33. Now, we shall deal with the ground of appeal no.9 challenging the findings of the lower authorities denying the exemption u/s 11 of the entire income for violation of provisions of section 13(1)(c) on receipt of the capitation fees. In the foregoing paragraphs, we held that the appellant society had been indulging in the practice of collection of capitation fees from the students for admission in various courses under the management quota. This capitation fees

58 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society was collected in cash, admittedly, not being used for the purpose of objects of the society for which it was formed, but allowed to be siphoned off by the President of the appellant society for his personal enrichment. The President of the appellant society had adopted a modus operandi by which by forming non-juridical organization with object of collection of capitation fees for the admissions under the management quota for the benefit of persons managing the appellant society and, therefore, it can be safely concluded that the appellant society was formed for the purpose of personal gain, it cannot be said to be an association formed with the object of charitable purpose as held by the PRIVY COUNCIL in the case of All India Spinners’ Association vs. CIT, 12 ITR 482 reiterated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Director of Income-tax vs. Bharat Diamond Bourse, 215 ITR 280 wherein, the Hon’ble Apex Court held that when specified person in the present case, President of the appellant society because of the position as a trustee, misuses his powers by lending himself or taking away the income or the funds of the trust, then it tantamount to breach of the trust indicating that the trust was formed for a personal gain and, therefore, it cannot be said that the objects of the appellant society

59 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society are charitable and, therefore, the income of the appellant trust does not qualify for exemption u/s 11 of the Act. Therefore, we uphold the action of the Assessing Officer in denying the exemption on the whole of income derived by the appellant society. We must clarify here that though the AO denied the exemption of entire income u/s 11 for the reason of alleged violation of provisions section 13(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, though the action of the AO denying the exemption on entire income is untenable under law for violation of provisions of section 13(1)(c), the action of the AO is upheld by us in view of our findings that the appellant society was formed with for the purpose of private gains. Thus, we do not find any merit in the ground of appeal no.9 raised by the appellant society and stands dismissed. 34. The ground no.8 challenges the findings of the lower authorities that the appellant society violated the provisions of section 13(1)(c) of the Act. It is unnecessary to deal with this ground of appeal for the reasons that in the foregoing paragraphs, we held that the appellant’s income is not eligible for exemption u/s 11 of the Act for the breach of trust committed by the management by diverting the income of the appellant society to their personal

60 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society enrichment. Thus, we uphold the denial of exemption u/s 11 of the Act. This ground of appeal 8 becomes academic. 35. The ground of appeal no.10 challenges the disallowance of prior period expenses. The Assessing Officer disallowed as sum of Rs.2,27,35,426/- by holding that the expenditure is pertaining to the prior period. No evidence is filed before us demonstrating that the liability for this expenditure was crystallized for the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration when the income of the appellant society has been assessed to tax. The action of the Assessing Officer on this issue is totally justified. Hence, we do not find any merit in the ground of appeal no.10 and the same stands dismissed. 36. In the result, the appeal of the assessee in IT(SS)A No.50/PUN/2017 for the assessment year 2014-15 is dismissed. ITA No.1654/PUN/2017, A.Y. 2014-15 – By Revenue : 37. Now, we shall take up the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No.1654/PUN/2017 for the assessment year 2014-15. The Revenue challenges that findings of the ld. CIT(A) holding that the income of the appellant society not attributable to the violation of provisions of section 13(1)(c) shall be taxed at normal rate of tax. This finding of

61 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society the ld. CIT(A) contrary to the plain provisions of section 164 of the Act, according to which, the beneficiaries of the trust are unknown. The income of the trust shall be assessed at maximum marginal rate of tax. Therefore, the findings of ld. CIT(A) are hereby reversed, the grounds of appeal filed by the Revenue stands allowed. 38. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No.1654/PUN/2017 for the assessment year 2014-15 is allowed. IT(SS)A Nos.44 to 49/PUN/2017, A.Ys. 2008-09 to 2013-14 – By Assessee : 39. Since the facts and issues involved in all the above captioned appeals are identical, therefore, our decision in IT(SS)A No.50/PUN/2017 for the assessment year 2014-15 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the remaining appeals of the assessee in IT(SS)A Nos.44 to 49/PUN/2017 for A.Ys. 2008-09 to 2013-14. Accordingly, the appeals of the assessee in IT(SS)A Nos.44 to 49/PUN/2017 A.Ys. 2008-09 to 2013-14 are dismissed. IT(SS)A Nos.54 to 59/PUN/2017, A.Ys. 2008-09 to 2013-14 – By Revenue : 40. Since the facts and issues involved in all the above captioned cross-appeals are identical, therefore, our decision in ITA

62 M/s. Sinhagad Technical Education Society No.1654/PUN/2017 for the assessment year 2014-15 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the remaining cross-appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos.54 to 59/PUN/2017 for A.Ys. 2008-09 to 2013-14. Accordingly, the cross-appeals of the Revenue in IT(SS)A Nos.54 to 59/PUN/2017 A.Ys. 2008-09 to 2013-14 are allowed. 41. To sum up, all the above captioned appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed and the cross-appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed, in the terms indicated above. Order pronounced on this 01st day of April, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; �दनांक / Dated : 01st April, 2022. Sujeet आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The CIT(A)-12, Pune. 4. The Pr. CIT Central, Pune. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” ब�च, 5. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 6. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.