Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK
Before: S/SHRI N.S SAINI & PAVAN KUMAR GADALE
1 ITA Nos. 263 to 266 /CT K/ 2016 Asse ssment Years :2 00 9-2 010 t o 20 12- 201 3
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK
BEFORE S/SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER
IT(ss) A Nos.22 to 25 /CTK/2016 Assessment Years :2003-04 to 2006-07 ITA Nos.235 to 240/CTK/2016 Assessment Years: 2007-08 to 2012-2013
Vidya Sagar Charitable Vs. ACIT, Circle 2(2), Trust, Plot No.A-103, Sahid Bhubaneswar. Nagar, Bhubaneswar. PAN/GIR No.AAATV 4014 D (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)
Assessee by : Shri B.D.Ojha, AR Revenue by : Shri S.K.Dash, CIT DR
Date of Hearing : 21/11/ 2017 Date of Pronouncement : 21 /11/ 2017
O R D E R Per N.S.Saini, AM These are appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders
of the CIT(A)- 3, Bhubaneswar dated 11..2016 for the assessment
years 2009-2010 to 2012-2013, respectively.
The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal in the
respective assessment years as under:
2009-2010
“ 1. Because that the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Bhubaneswar erred in law as well as in fact by confirming the disallowance of the benefit u/s 11 & 12 of the Act when the matter for grant of registration u/s 12AA of the Act is pending for disposal before the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bhubaneswar.
2 ITA Nos. 263 to 266 /CT K/ 2016 Asse ssment Years :2 00 9-2 010 t o 20 12- 201 3 2. Because that the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Bhubaneswar erred in law as well as in fact by confirming the addition of Rs.20,95,000/- towards amount paid in respect of rent U/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act which is contrary to evidence on record since the income of the appellant is exempt U/s 11 of The IT. Act, 1961 and part of the amount is no more payable at the year end.
Because that the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Bhubaneswar erred in law as well as in fact by confirming the addition of Rs.8,80,400/- u/s 41 of the Act towards cession of the liability and same is liable to be deleted.
Because that the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Bhubaneswar erred in law as well as in fact by confirming the addition of Rs.2,40,305/- in respect of donations paid which is contrary to the evidence on record and same is liable to be deleted.”
2010-2011
Because that the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Bhubaneswar erred in law as well as in fact by confirming the disallowance of the benefit u/s 11 & 12 of the Act when the matter for grant of registration u/s 12AA of the Act is pending for disposal before the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bhubaneswar.
Because that the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Bhubaneswar erred in law as well as in fact by confirming the addition of Rs.49,27,045/- u/s. 37 towards payment of interest which is contrary to the evidence on record as the income of the appellant has been treated as income from business.
Because that the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Bhubaneswar erred in law as well as in fact by confirming the addition of Rs.3,66,425/- (Rs.1,48,800 + 2,17,625) towards expenses incurred u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act which is contrary to evidence on record as the AO has treated the income of the appellant as income from business.”
2011-12 1. “Because that the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Bhubaneswar erred in law as well as in fact by confirming the disallowance of the benefit u/s 11 & 12 of the Act when the matter for grant of registration u/s 12AA of the Act is pending for disposal before the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bhubaneswar.
Because that the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Bhubaneswar erred in law as well as in fact by confirming the addition of Rs.33,37,858/- u/s. 37 towards payment of interest
3 ITA Nos. 263 to 266 /CT K/ 2016 Asse ssment Years :2 00 9-2 010 t o 20 12- 201 3 which is contrary to the evidence on record as the income of the appellant has been treated as income from business.
Because that the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Bhubaneswar erred in law as well as in fact by confirming the addition of Rs.13,05,759 (Rs.3,63,134 + Rs.9,42,625/-) towards expenses incurred u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act which is contrary to evidence on record as the AO has treated the income of the appellant as income from business.”
2012-2013
Because that the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Bhubaneswar erred in law as well as in fact by confirming the disallowance of the benefit u/s 11 & 12 of the Act when the matter for grant of registration u/s 12AA of the Act is pending for disposal before the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bhubaneswar.
Because that the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Bhubaneswar erred in law as well as in fact by confirming the addition of Rs.17,87,139/- u/s. 37 towards payment of interest which is contrary to the evidence on record as the income of the appellant has been treated as income from business.
Because that the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Bhubaneswar erred in law as well as in fact by confirming the addition of Rs.19,66,665/- and Rs.7,13,520/- towards expenses incurred u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act which is contrary to evidence on record as the AO has treated the income of the appellant as income from business.
Because that the CIT(A), Bhubaneswar erred in law as well as in fact by confirming the addition of Rs.66,501/- towards expenses incurred for charity & donation which is out of operational contingency and contrary to the evidence on record.”
Both the parties before us submitted that exemption u/s.11 & 12
was denied to the assessee as the assessee was not having registration
u/s.12AA of the Act. It was submitted that the Tribunal vide its order
dated 12.10.2017 in ITA No.303/CTK/2016 has allowed registration
u/s.12AA of the Act to the assessee and, therefore, all the issues involved
4 ITA Nos. 263 to 266 /CT K/ 2016 Asse ssment Years :2 00 9-2 010 t o 20 12- 201 3 in these appeals are to be restored back to the file of the Assessing
Officer for adjudication afresh.
In view of above submission of both the parties, we set aside the
orders of lower authorities and remand the matter back to the file of the
Assessing Officer to re-adjudicate the issues involved in these appeals in
the light of registration now granted to the assessee u/s.12AA of the Act
to the assessee.
In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for
statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 9 /11/2017. Sd/- sd/- (Pavan Kumar Gadale) (N.S Saini) JUDICIALMEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 9 /11/2017 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The appellant :Vidya Sagar Charitable Trust, Plot No.A-103, Sahid Nagar, Bhubaneswar. 2. The Respondent. DCIT, Circle 2(2), Bhubaneswar 3. The CIT(A)-3, Bhubaneswar 4. Pr.CIT-3, Bhubaneswar 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy// BY ORDER,
SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, Cuttack
5 ITA Nos. 263 to 266 /CT K/ 2016 Asse ssment Years :2 00 9-2 010 t o 20 12- 201 3