ITO (E), NEW DELHI vs. DLF QUTAB ENCLAVE COMPLEX MEDICAL CHARITABLE TRUST, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5283/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 May 2019AY 2012-134 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the issues were covered by its previous order in the same assessee's case for the preceding assessment year. Therefore, the departmental appeal was found to have no merit.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust declared NIL income, but the assessment was completed at Rs. 15.10 crores, denying exemptions under Sections 11 and 12. The CIT(A) had granted relief in the preceding year, and the facts were similar.

What were the issues?

Whether leasing/sale of medical sites constitutes a charitable activity and if the assessee was engaged in charitable activities eligible for exemption. Also, whether undue benefit was provided to related parties.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 2(15),Section 11,Section 12,Section 13(3),Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES “B”: DELHI

Before: SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL & BHAVNESH SAINI

Hearing: 08.05.2019Pronounced: 20.05.2019

PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. This appeal by Revenue has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-40, New Delhi, Dated 19.07.2016, for the A.Y. 2012-2013, on the following grounds :

1.

2 ITA.No.5283/Del./2016 DLF Qutab Enclave Complex Medical Charitable Trust, New Delhi. 1. “On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in holding that leasing/sale of medical sites is charitable activity as per the provisions of section 2(15) of the I.T. Act. 1961.

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the facts that the assessee was not doing any charitable activity which would make it eligible for exemptions u/s 11/12 of the I.T. Act.

3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in holding that the AO has not brought out any material on records to hold that assessee was providing undue benefit to the person covered u/s 13(3) by giving office space on lease to DLF Home Developers Ltd at rate much below than prevailing market rates.”

2.

Briefly the facts of the case are that assessee trust had filed return of income for the assessment year under appeal declaring NIL income. The assessment,

3 ITA.No.5283/Del./2016 DLF Qutab Enclave Complex Medical Charitable Trust, New Delhi. however, in this case has been completed at a total income of Rs.15.10 crores under section 143(3) of the I.T. Act vide assessment order dated 28.03.2015. In other words, the benefit of Sections 11 and 12 of the I.T. Act have been denied to the assessee. The assessee submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) that in preceding A.Y. 2011-2012 the assessee trust has been allowed full relief by the Ld. CIT(A). He has submitted that facts of the case are same in assessment year under appeal as have been considered in preceding assessment year. The Ld. CIT(A) found contention of assessee to be correct that in preceding A.Y. 2011-2012, the Ld. CIT(A) has allowed exemption under sections 11 and 12 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Therefore, all the additions have been deleted.

3.

Learned Counsel for the Assessee, at the outset, submitted that in preceding A.Y. 2011-2012 departmental appeal have been dismissed by the Tribunal vide Order dated 09.03.2018 in ITA.No.126/2016. Copy of the Order is produced on record and provided to the Ld. D.R. The Ld. D.R. did not dispute the same.

4 ITA.No.5283/Del./2016 DLF Qutab Enclave Complex Medical Charitable Trust, New Delhi.

4.

Considering the facts of the case and the fact that in preceding A.Y. 2011-2012, the Ld. CIT(A) allowed similar relief to the assessee and departmental appeal have been dismissed by the Tribunal vide Order dated 09.03.2018, therefore, the issues are covered by the Order of the ITAT, Delhi Bench in the case of same assessee (supra). We, therefore, do not find any merit in the departmental appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed.

5.

In the result, appeal of the Department dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open Court.

More judgments on Section 2(15)

All 2,878 judgments and leading authorities on Section 2(15) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →