SERVANTS OF THE PEOPLE SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE 2(1), NEW DELHI

The assessee has filed its instant four appeals i.e. 3182, 919 and 3109/Del/2023 against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s orders dated 07.09.2023, 25.08.2023, 30.01.2023 and 10.08.2023 having DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1055820136(1), ITBA/NFAC/S /250/2023-24/1055431678(1), ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 23/1049217904(1), ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1055037347(1); respectively involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.

Learned senior counsel very fairly submits at the outset that both the lower authorities herein have denied section 11 exemption benefit to the assessee/appellant in their respective identical findings that it’s case in fact is covered under section 2(15) 1st proviso since falling in the last limb of general public utility. The Revenue’s case, on the other hand, is that both the learned lower authorities have arrived at their identical conclusion in all these four assessment years that the assessee in fact carries all its activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business, as the case may be.

Faced with this situation, we sought to ascertain the assessee’s status all along as it is found to be an old trust carrying out its identical activities for almost hundred years. Learned senior counsel first invites our attention to the assessee’s case-law compilation running into 482 pages, wherefrom it is noticed that the very issue travelled upto the hon’ble apex court in assessment year 2011-12 involving the Revenue’s special leave petition i.e. SLP(C) No. 11017 of 2022. (pages 9 to 15). A perusal of their lordships detailed discussion dated 31st January, 2023 indicates that the very issue of assessee’s entitlement to claim section 11 exemption stand restored back to the Assessing Officer in light of CIT Vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority - [2022] 143 taxmann.com 278 (SC). Coupled with this learned senior counsel is equally fair in filing before us a copy of the Assessing Officer’s assessment order dated 14.03.2025 not making any disallowance/addition in its hands.

Be that as it may, we are of the considered view that once the hon’ble apex court had restored the matter back to the Assessing Officer to re-examine all the relevant facts in light of Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (supra), we hardly see any reason to 3 | P a g e adopt a different approach since bound by judicial discipline. We thus adopt the very course of action herein as well and direct the learned Assessing Office to examine the assessee’s activities herein as per law. It is further made clear that the assessee shall indeed be at liberty to plead and prove all of its relevant evidence in support of it’s section 11 exemption claim in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly. All other issues between the parties in the instant four appeals are kept open at this stage.