ASST CIT (E) 1(1), MUMBAI vs. BHANSALI TRUST, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3777/MUM/2016Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 April 2018AY 2011-124 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 followed its previous orders for earlier assessment years where identical facts led to the allowance of exemption. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to allow the exemption.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust amended its objects without intimating the Income Tax Department and sought to claim exemption under Section 11. The Assessing Officer denied the exemption, treating the income as that of an AOP.

What were the issues?

Whether amending the trust deed without intimating the authorities and obtaining fresh registration invalidates the claim for exemption under Section 11.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11,Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI N.K. PRADHAN

For Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swroop, DR
Hearing: 12/02/2018Pronounced: 11/04/2018

ORDER

PER N.K. PRADHAN, AM

1.

This is an appeal filed by the Revenue. The relevant assessment year is 2011-12. The appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Mumbai [ in short ‘CIT(A)] and arises out of the assessment completed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961, (the ‘Act’). As neither the assessee nor its authorized representative appeared before the Tribunal on the date fixed for hearing, we are proceeding to dispose off the matter on merit.

2.

The grounds raised

by the Revenue in this appeal read as under:

1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the claim of exemption u/s 11 of the Act even though assessee failed to intimate the changes made in object clause to CIT(Exemption) as per the undertaking given in form no. 10A and continued to enjoy benefits of valid 12A registration year after year, as the trust deed on the basis of which registration was granted was amended and therefore, the registration granted earlier ceased to exist?

2. The appellate prays that the order of the Ld. CIT(A), Mumbai be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.

3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is a trust registered with the Director of Income Tax (Exemption), Mumbai u/s 12A and also with Charity Commissioner, Mumbai. It filed its return of income for the assessment year (AY) 2011-12 on 24.11.2011 along with the income and expenditure account, balance sheet and audit report in Form No. 10B declaring total income at Rs. Nil. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) noticed that the object of the assessee-trust has been amended. New objects have been added to the existing objects of the trust and major alterations in the objects have been made. Therefore, the AO was of the view that it was mandatory on the part of the trust to seek a fresh registration with regard to the amended objects without which the new trust-deed is not covered in the ambit of section 11 of the Act. Having amended the trust- deed, it was incumbent upon the assessee to seek fresh registration on the basis of the amended trust-deed. The assessee has not done so. Therefore, the AO held that the registration granted by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai ceased to survive after the trust Bhansali Trust deed was altered by the assessee. Further, the application for registration u/s 12A filed in Form No. 10A contains an undertaking which requires the assessee to communicate the alteration. Therefore, the AO concluded that the registration earlier granted does not subsist in the year under consideration and thus brought to tax Rs.2,88,68,260/- under the normal provisions in the status of the AOP.

4.

Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) observed that the facts in the impugned assessment year are identical to AY 2010-11. The Tribunal in case of the assessee for AY 2010-11 followed the order of the Co- ordinate Bench for AY 2009-10 (ITA No. 5948/Mum/2012) and allowed the appeal filed by the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) followed the order of the Tribunal in the case of the assessee for the AY 2010-11 and held as under: As there is no change in facts, observations of the AO in the assessment order, the facts relating to enhancement of income and submissions of the appellant in the year under consideration as compared to AY 2010-11, the AO is directed to follow the above observations of the Hon’ble ITAT for this year as well.

5.

Before us, the Ld. DR relies on the order of the AO.

6.

We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the relevant materials on record. It is found that the ITAT in the case of the assessee-trust for AY 2010-11, by following the order of the Co-ordinate Bench for AY 2009- 10, has decided the same issue in favour of the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A)

More judgments on Section 11

All 7,190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →