9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 681X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e original objects continued to exist apart from the fact that the amended objects remain charitable - the CIT(A) was of the view that the assessee is entitled to exemption under section 12A - the assessee is entitled to claim exemption u/s 11 of the Act – Decided against Revenue. - ITA No.5280/Mum/2012 - - - Dated:- 26-2-2014 - Shri D. Manmohan And Shri N. K. Billaiya,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Ravi Prakash For the Respondent : Shri Nishit Gandhi ORDER Per D. Manmohan, V.P. This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-I, Mumbai and it pertains to A.Y. 2006-07. 2. The following grounds were urged by the Revenue: - Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s a hospital or other institution for treatment of persons suffering from illness or mental deformities. Accordingly assessment was completed by denying the claim of exemption. 4. On an appeal filed by the assessee the learned CIT(A) noticed that on an identical issue his predecessor, for A.Y. 2008-09, granted exemption under section 11 of the Act by observing as under: - I have considered the submission of the appellant s AR. I find that the appellant has duly claimed exemption u/s. 11 in the return of income filed in ITR 7. From the Xerox copy of the ITR 7, it is seen that the appellant has claimed deduction u/s. 10 at Nil as the appellant has claimed exemption u/s. 11 in ITR 7. This fact was brought to the notice of the AO during ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ption under section 12A and directed accordingly. 5. Aggrieved, Revenue is in appeal before us. The learned counsel for the assessee placed before us a copy of the order of the ITAT F Bench, Mumbai in assessee s own case for A.Y. 2008-09 (ITA No. 5802/Mum/2011 dated 19th October, 2012) wherein the Bench considered this very issue to hold that the assessee is entitled to claim exemption under section 11 of the Act. 6. The learned D.R. fairly admitted that the issue stands covered by the aforecited decision but, however, strongly relied upon the order passed by the AO. 7. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the record. Consistent with the view taken by the ITAT in assessee s own case for A.Y. 2008-09 we a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
