HARYANA RAJYA BAL BHAWAN CHARITABLE TRUST,KARNAL vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS), AMBALA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal admitted additional evidence filed by the assessee and remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer is to reconsider the issue after duly considering the Audit Report.
What were the facts?
The assessee challenged reassessment proceedings and the addition of Rs. 49,30,248/- to its income. The Assessing Officer taxed this amount because the assessee utilized only Rs. 79,62,007/- and did not file Form 10 for accumulation.
What were the issues?
Whether reassessment proceedings were validly initiated and whether grants received by the assessee were correctly treated as income chargeable to tax.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 147,Section 148,Section 11(1)(a),Section 11(2),Section 12A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH’A’, CHANDIGARH
Before: SMT. DIVA SINGH & DR. B.R.R. KUMAR
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH’A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.535/Chd/2017 Assessment Year: 2010-11
Haryana Rajya Bal Bhawan Vs. The ITO (Exemptions) Charitable Trust Ambala Karnal
PAN No. AAATH4451N
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee By : Shri. Gurjeet Singh Revenue By : Smt. Chandrakanta
Date of hearing : 27/08/2018 Date of Pronouncement : 31/08/2018 ORDER PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, A.M:
The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) Karnal dt. 03/01/2017.
In the present appeal Assessee has raised the following grounds:
Because the action is being challenged on facts & law for the initiation, continuation and conclusion of the reassessment proceedings u/s 147 r.w. 148 of the Act at an amount of Rs. 49,30,248/-. 2. Because the addition of Rs. 49,30,248/- made u/s ll(l)(a) is being challenged on facts & law and the chargeability is only on the receipts of the Grant-in-Aid from the state U/A 12 of the Constitution of India. 3. Because the action is being challenged on facts & law for wrongly treating the grants made by Government for specific purposes to be income chargeable to tax. 4. Because the action is being challenged on facts & law for non-filing of Form No. 10 is a technicality which cannot be utilized for declining the claim of exemption (2017) 145 DTR 0415 (Kar).
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had gross receipt of Rs.1,51,67,359/-and under the provisions of Section 11(1)(a) 85% of income i.e; Rs. 1,28,92,225/- has to be applied. The Assessing Officer held that since an amount of Rs. 79,62,007/- only was utilized and since the assessee has not submitted Form -10 for accumulation of funds under section 11(2), he brought
the income of Rs. 4,93,0248/- to tax. It was argued by the Ld. AR that the assessee has received only Rs. 7960/- through grants in aid against the observation of the Assessing Officer. He filed additional evidences consisting of Audit Report under section 12A(b) of the Act in the Form 10B in accordance with the rules which has been admitted as it goes to the root cause of the addition. 4. Since, the additional evidences are not available for the Revenue the matter is being remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer to take a decision in accordance with the provisions in force after duly considering the Audit Report filed by the Assessee. 5. As a result appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court.
Sd/- Sd/- (DIVA SINGH) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated : 31/08/2018 AG Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) The DR 5.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Kavya Shrivastava vs. Hdfc Bank LTD.Madhya Pradesh · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Gaurav Jewellers Through Proprietor Gaurav Barjatiya vs. Branch Manager Yes Bank LTD.Madhya Pradesh · 15 Oct 2026
- Kavya Shrivastava vs. State Bank Of INDIAMadhya Pradesh · 15 Oct 2026
- Paresh Textiles Prop Paresh Gudhka vs. Superintendent Range Iv Div VBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Palladium Constructions PVT LTD. vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central TaxKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026