9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 198X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y has been granted registration u/s 12A and when the assessee society has applied more than 85% of its total receipts for the objects and charitable purposes of the society, then certainly the assessee society was entitled for exemption u/s 11. No infirmity, ambiguity or any other valid reason to interfere with the impugned order. Against revenue. - ITA No.4215/Del/2012 - - - Dated:- 12-4-2013 - Shri G. D. Agrawal And Shri Chandra Mohan Garg,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Bhim Singh, Sr. DR For the Respondent : Shri S. Krishnan ORDER Per Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial Member. The above appeal has been filed by the revenue against the order of CIT(A), Meerut dated 05.05.2012 in Appeal No. 362/11-12 for AY 2009-10. 2. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see was running a number of higher technical education institutions at Meerut and Greater Noida which were engaged in the process of imparting higher professional education in the field of engineering, law, management, hotel management, pharmacy and medical sciences etc. The Assessing Officer also observed that the assessee society has been granted registration u/s 12A of the Act and was eligible for exemption u/s 11 of the Act. The Assessing Officer finally held that the total application of income during the year under consideration was more than 85% of the total receipts. Hence exemption u/s 11 was allowed to the assessee. But at the end of assessment completed u/s 143(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer finalized the assessment on retu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ety has applied more than 85% of its total receipts and the Assessing Officer also allowed exemption u/s 11 of the Act. In the last sentence of the assessment order, the Assessing Officer held that the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act on returned income of Rs.1,85,50,256/-. 7. Ld. DR placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetz (India) Ltd. 284 ITR 323 (SC) and another decision of ITAT Mumbai in the case of Elel Hotels Investment Ltd. Vs CIT [2005] 2 SOT 659 (Mum.). On careful perusal of above citations, we observe that reliance on Goetz (India) Ltd. (supra) is misconceived because the ratio of this judgment is that the Assessing Officer is bound to the claims made in a return by the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... but omitted to do so. 8. From the impugned order, we observe that the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) did not allow any new exemption or deduction to the assessee but the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) simply corrected the assessment order with an observation that the assessee society was exempted u/s 11 of the Act, therefore the assessment was to be made at nil income and the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) directed the Assessing Officer to finalize the assessment accordingly. We are unable to see any infirmity, ambiguity or any other valid reason to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, ground no. 1 and 2 of the Revenue being devoid of merits are dismissed. 9. In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed. - - TaxTMI - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
