9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 327X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ual conduct of the assessee even if it is not mentioned in the return, it makes no difference to the status of the assessee - as predominant object of the assessee has been found the welfare of its members and in the process if any income is received from a person other than the members it would not change the status of the assessee - in favour of assessee. Addition on account of membership contribution - CIT(A) deleted it - Held that:- As decided in assessee's own case for the assessment year 2006-07 on similar facts CIT(A) has deleted the addition made on account of membership subscription on the basis that the assessee is covered by the doctrine of mutuality - as doctrine of mutuality proved in favour of assessee addition need to be d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fixed deposit as not exempt under the doctrine of mutuality. 3. At the outset the LD. AR pointed out that the issues raised in the present appeals are fully covered by the decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of assessee itself for the assessment year 2006-07 under similar facts. He has furnished a copy of the decision of the Tribunal in the above case in ITA No. 4228 and 4489/D/2009 (Asstt. Year 2006-07), order dated 6th July, 2012. 4. Ld. DR did not dispute the above submission of the Ld. AR. He however placed reliance on the assessment order in support of the appeal filed by the revenue. 5. Having gone through the cited decision of the Tribunal in the case of assessee itself for the assessment year 2006-07 (supra) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uthority holding that the assessee is a mutual concern and is covered by the concept of mutuality. The finding of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue under similar facts during the year that the assessee is a mutual concern and is thus covered by the concept of mutuality is upheld . Ground No. 1 (revenue s appeal) is accordingly rejected. 6. The issue raised in ground No. 2 (Revenue) is also covered by the decision of Tribunal in the case of assessee for the assessment year 2006-07 (supra). In this ground, the revenue has questioned the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in deleting the addition of Rs. 7,20,863/- made by the AO on account of membership contribution. The contention of the revenue is that the assessee society was not covered by the doctrine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t exempt under the doctrine of mutuality. 10. During the assessment year 2006-07 an identical issue was raised. In that year the assessee had earned interest from Corporation Bank amounting to Rs.2,47,113/- and interest from OBC bank amounting to Rs. 23,506/-. The assessee claimed that it was following cash system of accounting and interest as and when is received is booked as income. The Ld. CIT(A) did not agree with the contention of the assessee and upheld the additions made by the AO, on respect of the above stated interest earned from the said banks. The Tribunal held that the decision of Ld. CIT(A) in respect of treatment of interest income are contradictory. He had deleted interest income of Rs. 1,34,234/- on the basis of concept o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
