Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC 3’, NEW DELHI
Before: BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY
Appellant by : Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr.D.R Respondent by : Sh. Gaurav Jain, Adv. Ms. Bhavita Kumar, Adv. ORDER This is an appeal filed by the revenue directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-40, New Delhi dated 23/04/2014 for the assessment year 2011 – 12 on the following grounds: “ on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing the benefit of section 11 and 12 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) ignoring the fact that the assessee’s activities involve rendering of service in relation to carrying on of a commerce or business and hence, proviso to section 2 ( 15) of the I T act, is clearly applicable in case of the assessee.”
2. After hearing rival contentions I find that the Ld. 1st appellate authority has at paragraph 3.7 given a finding that the assessee is not involved in any trade, commerce or business and as such, the mischief of proviso to section 2(15) is not applicable. He allowed exemption under section 11( 1) of the act.
While doing so he applied the judgement of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of India trade promotion Organisation VS. DG IT(E), 53 taxman.com (Delhi) 2015.
I also find that the issue is covered by the order of the ITAT Delhi benches in order dated 06/06/2016 in the case of “Society of Indian auto Mobile Manufacturers Association” for assessment year 2009-10. The Ld. departmental representative could not controvert the submissions of the Ld. counsel for the assessee.
In view of the above discussion, I respectfully follow the decision of the jurisdictional High Court as well as the ITAT Delhi benches referred above and uphold the order of the 1st appellate authority and dismiss this appeal of the revenue 5. In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 25th January, 2017.