Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘ A’ BENCH : CHENNAI
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI S.JAYARAMAN
आदेश / O R D E R
PER BENCH:
ITA Nos.1833 & 1834/Chny/2019 are appeals filed by the Revenue and C.O Nos.80 & 81/Chny/2019 are Cross-Objections filed by the assessee against the common Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 10, Chennai, in & 197/17-18 dated 28.02.2019 for assessment to1835/chny/2019 :- 2 -: C.O No.80 to 82/chny/19 years 2010-11 & 2011-12. is an appeal filed by the Revenue and C.O No.83 /Chny/2019 is Cross-Objections filed by the assessee against the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 10, Chennai, in ITA Nos.198/17-18/C.I.T(A)-10(Tr.) dated 28.02.2019 for assessment year 2015-16. Since common issue arises for consideration in all these appeals and Cross objections, all these appeals of Revenue and C.O. filed by the assessee are disposed of by this common order.
2. Mr.S.Bharath represented on behalf of the Revenue and Mr.S.Bhaskar represented on behalf of the Assessee.
The Revenue has raised the following common grounds in all these three appeals for our consideration.
The order of the ld. CIT(A) is contrary to the Law and facts of the case.
2.1 The ld.CIT(A) is not justified in granting exemption u/s.10(21) of the Act categorizing the “Institution” as “Association”.
2.2. The ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the DGIT(Exemption) has passed revision order u/s.154 on 12.07.2006 vide F.No.DGIT(E)/TN-43/154/35(1)(iii)/2006-07/630 categorizing the assessee as institution only for the purpose of Sec.35(1)(iii) of the Act and thus reversed the earlier order dated 08.02.2006. to1835/chny/2019 :- 3 -: C.O No.80 to 82/chny/19
2.3 The ld.CIT(A) ought to have held tht the categorization as Institution of the assessee deprives the assessee of the Exemption u/s.10(21) of the Act which is available only to an assessee categorized as Association for the purpose of Sec.35(1)(ii) of the Act.
2.4 The ld.CIT(A) erred by relying on the THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL order passed for assessment year 1997- 98 in dated 26.05.2006 and for the assessment years 2012-13 to 2014-15 vide ITA No.2896,2897 & 2898/chny/2017 dated 26.04.2018 without noting that the Department has not accepted the decision of the Hon”ble I.T.A.T and appeals have been filed before Hon”ble Madras High Court and the issue has not become final.”
At the time of hearing, it is submitted by the ld.AR that the issue in these appeals of Revenue are squarely covered by the decisions of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in assessee’s own case for assessment year 1997-98 in vide order dated 26.05.2006 and for the assessment years 2012- 13 to 2014-15 in ITA Nos.2896 to 2898/Mds/2017 vide order dated 26.04.2018. It was further submitted that ld.CIT(A) had followed the judicial discipline by following decisions of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in assessee’s own case for the assessment year 1997-98 and for the assessment years 2012-13 to 2014-15 (supra). It was submitted that the only issue in these appeals was to1835/chny/2019 :- 4 -: C.O No.80 to 82/chny/19 against the action of ld.CIT(A) granting exemption u/s.10(21) of the Act.
In reply, ld.DR strongly supported the order of the Assessing Officer.
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. The primary order of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for the assessment year 1997-98 referred to supra wherein wherein the co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal has held as follows:
“It is seen from the Certificate of Registration of Societies that except the change in the name, there is no change in the objectives of the Assessee-society since its inception and this change was effected by the Registrar of Societies on May, 2002 wherein it is certified that the Society “FREDRICK INSTITUTE OF PLANT PROTECTION AND TOXICOLOGY (FIPPAT) changed its name as INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF BIO TECHNOLOGY AND TOXICOLOGY (IIBAT)” It is a fact that the Assessee-society is a registered society engaged in scientific research activities and ever since its inception it is engaged with the objectives of the research in plan protection, toxicology and related areas which taken out from the object of the Society reads as under:
1. To conduct studies on plant protection, dissipation/environmental fate and characterize chemistry of plant protection substances covering biological, microbial, botanical and synthetic pesticides.
To elucidate possible toxicological consequences due to the use of agrochemicals such as pesticides and Drugs/Pharmaceuticals includes Natural!Ayurvedic Drugs. 3. To analyze and evaluate blo safety of transgenic crops/food. 4. To compute risk assessment, based upon blo safety investigations, of transgenic crops, recombinant DNA and other biotech based products. 5. To identify and search for natural/biological agents which can alleviate the possible toxicological manifestations caused by chemical pesticides.
to1835/chny/2019 :- 5 -: C.O No.80 to 82/chny/19
6. To conduct basis research studies to develop, characterize and test in vitro cell line models to assess toxicity of environmental agents.
To establish and conduct non-clinical safety assessment of environmental agents under the principles of Good Laboratory Practices (GLP)”
The denial of exemption by the Assessing Officer is based on the fact that the Assessee is classified as an Institution. It is the case of the Department that the Assessee-society is classified as an Institution and not as an Association and as per the provisions of sec.10(21) of the Act, exemption is available only to an Association. But once the fact that the Assessee-society is engaged in research work regarding agriculture related activities and it is recognized as a leading National Body in the field of Research in Bio-Technology and Toxicology. Further, the Central Board of Direct Taxes has classified the Assessee-society as an Association in the year 1997, after due verification of its object as well as its activities and there is no change in the objectives of the Assessee-society from its inception till date. In view of these facts and circumstances of the case and respectfully following the Tribunals decision cited supra, we hold that the Assessee is entitled to exemption under sec.1O(21) of the Act as the Assessee-society is engaged in research work in agriculture related activities.”
As it is noticed that the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal has been followed by the ld.CIT(A) for the assessment year 1997-98, 2000-01 and 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15, and the years under appeal are the years in between the years, which have been missed out, and also no distinguishing facts have been brought out by the Revenue, respectfully following the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in assessee’s own case referred to supra, the findings of ld.CIT(A) in all these appeals stand confirmed. to1835/chny/2019 :- 6 -: C.O No.80 to 82/chny/19
In respect of Cross objections filed by the assessee , no serious arguments have been placed before us. All the Cross Objections are dismissed as not argued.
9.In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for assessment years 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2015-16 are dismissed and corresponding Cross Objections of the assessee stand dismissed.