Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, Jharkhand Bhawan Evam Anya Sanirman Karmkar Kalyan Board, is an appellant before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal against the orders of the CIT(A). The assessee argues that it is an instrumentality of the Central Government and performs sovereign functions, thus seeking to be declared as a 'State' not liable to income tax.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had not made any representation before the Assessing Officer. Consequently, the issues in the appeal were restored to the file of the AO for adjudication, with directions to consider the applicability of the 'State' status and other related legal issues.
Key Issues
Whether the Jharkhand Bhawan Evam Anya Sanirman Karmkar Kalyan Board qualifies as a 'State' under relevant legal provisions, and consequently, whether its income is not chargeable to tax.
Sections Cited
Section 6 of BOCW Act, 1996, Section 7 of BOCW Act, 1996, Article 366(28) of Constitution of India, Section 22 of BOCW Act, 1996, Section 4 of BOCW Act, 1996, Section 40A(3) of IT Act, 1961, Article 12 of Constitution of India, Article 289 of Constitution of India
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
BEFORES/ S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Nos.99, 100 & 101/RAN/20 /RAN/2025 Assessment Year Assessment Years: 2013-14,2015-16 & 2018 16 & 2018-19 S.A. No.10, 11 & 12/Ran/2025 11 & 12/Ran/2025 Jharkhand Jharkhand Bhawan Bhawan Evam Evam vs Income Income Tax Tax Officer, Officer, War War- Anya Anya SanirmanKarmkar SanirmanKarmkar 1(1), 1(1), Central Central Revenue Revenue Kalyan Board, Joint Labour Kalyan Board, Joint Labour Building, Main Road, Ranchi Main Road, Ranchi Building, Building, Behind Behind Ashoka Ashoka Hotel, Doranda, Ranchi Hotel, Doranda, Ranchi PAN/GIR No. .AABAJ 41569 K (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee by : Shri M.K.Chowdhary, Adv M.K.Chowdhary, Adv Revenue by :Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT DR CIT DR Date of Hearing : 13/06/202 2025 Date of Pronouncement :13/06/ /2025 O R D E R Per Bench These are appeal appeals filed by the assessee against the separate separate orders of the ld CIT(A)-NFAC, NFAC, Delhi Delhi all all dated 12.3.2025 in in Appeal Appeal No. No.NFAC/2012- 13/10231287, Appeal No.NFAC/2014 13/10231287, Appeal No.NFAC/2014-15/10266681 and Appeal No.NFAC/2017 15/10266681 and Appeal No.NFAC/2017- 18/10245078 for the assessment years 2013-14,2015 14,2015-16 & 2018-19, respectively. The assessee has also filed stay petitions. . The assessee has also filed stay petitions.
P a g e 1 | 13 , 100 & 101/RAN/2025 S.A.No.10 to 12/Ran/2025Assessment Years: 202013-14,2015-16 & 2018-19
Smt. Rinku Singh, Ld CIT DR appeared for the revenue and ShriM.K.Chowdhary,ld AR appeared for the assessee.
It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee proposed to file written submission and same are filed, which reads as follows:
P a g e 2 | 13 , 100 & 101/RAN/2025 S.A.No.10 to 12/Ran/2025Assessment Years: 202013-14,2015-16 & 2018-19
P a g e 3 | 13 , 100 & 101/RAN/2025 S.A.No.10 to 12/Ran/2025Assessment Years: 202013-14,2015-16 & 2018-19
P a g e 4 | 13 , 100 & 101/RAN/2025 S.A.No.10 to 12/Ran/2025Assessment Years: 202013-14,2015-16 & 2018-19
P a g e 5 | 13 , 100 & 101/RAN/2025 S.A.No.10 to 12/Ran/2025Assessment Years: 202013-14,2015-16 & 2018-19
P a g e 6 | 13 , 100 & 101/RAN/2025 S.A.No.10 to 12/Ran/2025Assessment Years: 202013-14,2015-16 & 2018-19
P a g e 7 | 13 , 100 & 101/RAN/2025 S.A.No.10 to 12/Ran/2025Assessment Years: 202013-14,2015-16 & 2018-19
P a g e 8 | 13 , 100 & 101/RAN/2025 S.A.No.10 to 12/Ran/2025Assessment Years: 202013-14,2015-16 & 2018-19
P a g e 9 | 13 , 100 & 101/RAN/2025 S.A.No.10 to 12/Ran/2025Assessment Years: 202013-14,2015-16 & 2018-19
P a g e 10 | 13 , 100 & 101/RAN/2025 S.A.No.10 to 12/Ran/2025Assessment Years: 202013-14,2015-16 & 2018-19
It was the submission that the assessee is an instrumentality of Central Governmentto implement the direction of the execution of building and other construction workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996 and building and other construction workers ‘s welfare Cess Act, 1996,. It was the submission that the Board of the assessee consisted ofnominated representativesand State Government officials. It was the submission that in view of the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal Cuttack bench in the case of WATCO vs CIT, 146 taxmann.com 4 (CTC) aa also the decision of ITAT Mumbai in the case of CIT vs Maharashtra Labour Welfare Board (2-24) 118 ITR (Trib) 494 and the decision of the ITAT Cuttack in the case of State Pollution Control Board vs ITO, 172, taxmann.com 12 (CTC) and in the case of Maharashtra State Board of Technical Education vs ITO, 104 TAXMANN.COM 98 (Mum), the assessee is liable to be treated as “State”. It was the prayer that the issue AO may be directed to treat the assessee as “State”.
In reply, ld CIT DR submitted that the assessee has not appeared before the Assessing Officer nor provided any information. It was the submission that on account of non-representation, the assessment has been done exparte. It was the submission that’s the issue may be restored to the file of the AO for readjudication including the issue of “State”.
P a g e 11 | 13 , 100 & 101/RAN/2025 S.A.No.10 to 12/Ran/2025Assessment Years: 202013-14,2015-16 & 2018-19
We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the facts in the present case clearly shows that the assessee has not made any representation and provided all the details before the AO. This being so, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the AO for readjudication after con allowing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The AO shall consider the applicability of the status of “State”. The AO shall also examine whether the assessee falls within the criterion as mentioned in the decisions of the Co- ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of WATCO, Maharashtra Labour Welfare Board,State Pollution Control Board and Maharashtra State Board of Technical Education ,referred to (supra) by ld AR of the assessee. All issues including the issue of reopening such as legal issue are left open for the assessee to raise before the AO. In these circumstances, with the above directions, the issues are restored to the file of the AO.
7.. In the result, appeals` of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes.
The assessee has filed stay petitions being S.A. 11 and 12/RAN/2025. As we have already disposed off the appeals filed by the assessee, the Stay Petitions have become infructuous and same are dismissed as infructuous.