2019 (6) TMI 1637 - AT - Income Tax

Exemption u/s 11 - charitable activity u/s 2(15) - claim of accumulation under section 11(2) - denial of claim as activity of the assessee involves advancement of any other abject of general public utility and its receipts exceeds the mandatory limit as specified under proviso to section 2(15) - THAT - As decided in own case 2018 (10) TMI 1915 - ITAT AHMEDABAD there is no change in the facts and circumstances in the impugned case in comparison to the previous assessment years and the Revenue in earlier year has accepted the same. Therefore in our considered view the principles of consistency should be applied. In this regard we find principles laid down in the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 1991 (11) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT are directly attracted to the instant case wherein it was observed that in the absence of any material change in the facts the Revenue should not take a different view in the other year. Appeal of the revenue is dismissed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
- Appeal against order allowing accumulation under sections 11(1)(a) and 11(2) without considering proviso to section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
1. The revenue appealed against the order of the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2014-15, challenging the allowance of accumulation under sections 11(1)(a) and 11(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessing officer had earlier determined the total income of the assessee, a trust, at a certain amount, disputing the charitable nature of the assessee's activities related to vocational skill development and manpower surveys. The assessing officer invoked the proviso to section 2(15) along with section 13(8) of the Act to deny the benefit of sections 11 and 12 to the assessee.

2. The assessee, aggrieved by the assessing officer's decision, filed an appeal before the CIT(A), who ruled in favor of the assessee. During the appellate proceedings, the assessee's counsel highlighted a previous decision by the ITAT, Ahmedabad, in the case of the same assessee for assessment years 2009-10 and 2012-13, where a similar issue was decided in favor of the assessee. The ITAT's decision emphasized the principle of consistency and cited relevant case law to support the assessee's eligibility for deduction under sections 11(1)(a) and 11(2) of the Act.

3. The ITAT, following the precedent set by its earlier decision and considering the consistency principle, dismissed the revenue's appeal, stating that the assessee was entitled to the deduction under the relevant sections of the Act. The ITAT's decision was based on the lack of material changes in the facts and circumstances compared to previous assessment years, where the revenue had accepted the same position. The ITAT's judgment emphasized the importance of maintaining consistency in tax assessments and highlighted the principle established by the Supreme Court in similar cases.

4. Ultimately, the ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision in favor of the assessee, concluding that there was no merit in the revenue's appeal. The ITAT's order, pronounced on 26-06-2019, dismissed the revenue's appeal, affirming the assessee's eligibility for the deduction under sections 11(1)(a) and 11(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.