Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
Before: DR. M. L. MEENA & SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE
Per Dr. M. L. Meena, AM:
This appeal has been filed by the by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Jalandhar dated
01.10.2018 in respect of Assessment Year: 2015-16.
2 ITA No. 22/Asr/2019 Ludhiana Distt. Cricket Association v. ITO 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
“1. That the ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in assessing the income at Rs.7,90,442/- against the Nil income as declared by the assessee.
That the ld. CIT(A) has also erred in disallowing the exemption of income as claimed to the tune of Rs.7,90,442/- and such action of the ld. CIT(A) is against the facts and circumstances of the case.
That the ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering the submissions of the assessee that the application for registration had been made in the year 2007 and since it has not been granted within the stipulate time and, therefore, it should have presumed that the approval has already been granted u/s 12AA and, thus, the denial of exemption u/s 12AA is not proper. 4. That the ld. CIT(A) has summarily followed the order of the Assessing Officer, without analyzing the detailed submissions as made before him. 5. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend the grounds of appeal before the appeal is finally heard or disposed off.”
None attended for the assesse. The notice of hearing is received
back with the postal remark that the addressee is left. Since, the assessee
has been granted sufficient opportunity of being heard by fixing the case for
hearing on 21.04.2022, 05.07.2022, 31.08.2022 and the 26.07.2023 and
hence, it is decided to hear the ld. DR and adjudicate the appeal on merits
of the case.
The appellant claimed that it was engaged in the providing sports
facilities to the general public to the players for cricket and to shape the
3 ITA No. 22/Asr/2019 Ludhiana Distt. Cricket Association v. ITO future of the young, aspiring players who can represent the state and
country in future during the Assessment 2015-2016. The case of the
appellant was selected for scrutiny and the Ld. Assessing Officer assessed
the income of the appellant at Rs. 7,90,442/- against NIL returned income
vide order dated 13.12.2017 passed under Section 143(3) of the Income
Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’).
The assesse being aggrieved with the Assessment Order, went in
appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who has confirmed the addition by observing
vide para 4.2 to 4.5 as under:
4.2 I have gone through the assessment order passed by the AO, submissions filed by the appellant and find that total income has been assessed at Rs. 7,90,442 as against Nil income declared by the appellant in the return of income filed. The excess of income over expenditure declared by the appellant in the income & expenditure account filed was brought to tax after denying the claim of exemption of income u/s 11 of the IT Act. The claim was denied by the AO as the appellant society was found to have not been registered u/s 12AA of the IT Act and also no approval was obtained u/s 10(23C) of the IT Act.
4.3 The appellant has justified the claim of exemption of income on the ground that it is entitled to the same under the provisions of IT Act. The appellant has reiterated the submissions filed before the AO at the stage of assessment. It is submitted that the appellant is engaged in providing sports facilities to the general public in the field of cricket and to shape the future of young, aspiring players who can represent the state and country in future. The appellant has stated that an application was made in 2007 and it is presumed that approval has been granted u/s 12 AA of the IT Act. The appellant has placed reliance on certain judicial decisions to support its contentions on the issue of deemed approval.
4 ITA No. 22/Asr/2019 Ludhiana Distt. Cricket Association v. ITO 4.4 Having considered the submissions made in this regard, I find that these contentions have already been examined by the AO after making reference to the records. The issue of deemed approval has been discussed by the AO elaborately in para 3 of the assessment order and do not find force in the contentions of the appellant. A careful perusal of the facts clearly reveal that the requisite details have not been furnished by the appellant at the time of seeking approval. Thus, I find that decisions relied upon by the appellant are clearly distinguishable on account of differences in the factual matrix of the present case.
4.5 In the absence of any further evidence being brought on record by the appellant to controvert the findings given by the AO in this regard, I hold that AO was confirmed in denying the claim of exemption. Hence, addition made by the AO is confirmed.
We have heard the Ld. DR, perused the material on record,
impugned order, and written submission. Admittedly, the appellant society
was neither registered u/s 12AA of the IT Act nor approved u/s 10(23C) of
the IT Act. The appellant has reiterated the submissions filed before the
authorities below AO regarding its activities and filing of an application for
registration in 2007 which is to be presumed as deemed approval has been
granted u/s 12 AA of the IT Act. The appellant has placed reliance on
certain judicial citations in support of its contentions on the issue of deemed
approval. In our view, merely filing of an application for grant of registration
u/s 12A would not automatically make the appellant eligible for exemption
either u/s 12AA or 10(23C) of the Act.
5 ITA No. 22/Asr/2019 Ludhiana Distt. Cricket Association v. ITO 7. The contention of the appellant that failure on the part of the authority
concerned to pass order within the statutorily period of limitation will give
rise to a presumption of deemed registration is not tenable under law. To
our understanding, there is no concept of deemed approval under the
mandate as rightly examined by the authorities below by distinguishing the
case laws cited by the appellant on the factual matrix of the instant case. In
view of that matter we find no error or perversity in the order passed by the
Ld. CIT(A) to the facts on record.
In the above view, we do not find any merit or substance in the
appeal of the assessee and Accordingly, the impugned order of the Ld.
CIT(A) confirming addition of Rs. 7,90,442/-, is sustained.
In the result, the appeal of the assesse is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 04.08.2023
Sd/- Sd/- (Anikesh Banerjee) (Dr. M. L. Meena) Judicial Member Accountant Member *GP/Sr.PS* Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Appellant: (2) The Respondent: (3) The CIT(Appeals) (4) The CIT concerned
6 ITA No. 22/Asr/2019 Ludhiana Distt. Cricket Association v. ITO (5) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T.