Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. T. S. Kapoor
ORDER This is an appeal filed by assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-40, Delhi dated 19.07.2018.
The grounds of appeal
taken by assessee are reproduced below: 1. in determining taxable income in a sum of Rs.8,46,610/- against the returned income amounting to Rs.3,72,159/-; 2. in not allowing application of income towards charity in a sum of Rs.4,74,453/- against income determined u/s 11 (3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. These actions being arbitrary, erroneous and untenable must be quashed with directions for appropriate relief.”
3. At the outset, the Authorized Representative submitted that assessee is a charitable organization and is registered u/s 12AA of the Act. It was submitted that while filing the 2 Ujagarmal Chanderbhan Charitable Trust return of income, the assessee claimed amount of Rs.8,46,610/- as income chargeable u/s 11(1B) of the Act which the assessee had claimed wrongly. It was submitted that the assessee had been accumulating 15% of its excess of income over expenditure to be spent in the succeeding years. It was submitted that 15% carry forward is permitted u/s 11(1)(a) of the Act on the basis of income reported in the return. It was submitted that in a case where income had accrued but not received the application to the extent of 85% becomes not feasible and only then Section 11(1B) of the Act comes into play. It was submitted that in the case under consideration, the deficit was being sought as per the provisions of Section 11(1)(a) of the Act and it was humbly requested that the case may be set aside to the Assessing Officer who can verify the accumulated balances and could arrive at the just decision.
The ld. Departmental Representative, however, submitted that instead of remitting the issue back to Assessing Officer it should be remitted to ld. CIT(A) who can decide the issue by calling remand report from the Assessing Officer. The ld. AR did not object to the proposal of the ld. DR.
I have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. I find that it is a fit case which requires to be remitted back to ld. CIT(A) who should re-decide the issue after obtaining remand report from the Assessing Officer with respect to accumulated balance available to the assessee out of carryover of profits from earlier years. Needless to say that assessee will be provided sufficient opportunity of being heard.
3 Ujagarmal Chanderbhan Charitable Trust 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. (Order pronounced in the Court on 30 t h day of May, 2019 at New Delhi)