Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2014 (6) TMI 327

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , there was no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) – Decided against Revenue. Validity of reopening of assessment - Proceedings initiated after four years – Held that:- Assessee contended that reopening could be held to be valid, only if it is found to be for the failure on the part of the assessee to disclose the fully and truly all the material relevant for completion of the assessment - reopening of assessment has been done, as it came to notice from the AIR information that the assessee has acquired RBI Bonds worth Rs.2 crores - But for this reason stated in the notice of reopening of assessment, there is no discussion whatsoever in that regard in the assessment order, much less any addition made in that behalf - there is no new mat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ot the records transferred from ITO Ward 9(2), and during the course of re-assessment proceedings asked the assessee to produce the copy of approval under S.10(23C)(vi) and a copy of Registration under S.12A of the Act. As the assessee could not produce the approval under S.10(23C) of the Act, he held that assessee is not eligible for exemption of its income from tax, and further observing that since the assessee is running an educational institution, it is eligible for exemption, if at all, under S.10(23C) of the Act, and not under S.11 of the Act, proceeded to complete the assessment on the surplus income of the assessee over its expenditure, which was determined at Rs.1,61,28,030, vide order of assessment dated 22.11.2010 passed under S. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... A) ought to have appreciated that sub-clause (vi) to section 10(23C), as inserted by the Finance Act, 1998 w.e.f. 01.04.1999, states that the University or other educational institution existing society for educational purpose, and which may be approved by the prescribed authority. The issue is explicitly dealt with by the Act itself and the intention of the legislature is quite clear from it. 5. The Ld. CIT(Appeals) ought to have appreciated that obtaining approval from the prescribed authority is mandatory, as per the plain meaning of seciton10(23C)(vi) of the I.T. Act, 1961,whenever the gross receipts of an educational institution exceeded Rs.One crore. 6., The decision of Ld. CIT(A) that it has relied on the previous decision of h .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Revenue are rejected. 7. As for the grievance of the assessee in its cross-objection, we find that the proceedings for reopening of the assessment in this case have been initiated after completion of four years. That being so, such reopening could be held to be valid, only if it is found to be for the failure on the part of the assessee to disclose the fully and truly all the material relevant for completion of the assessment. In this case, reopening of assessment has been done, as it came to notice from the AIR information that the assessee has acquired RBI Bonds worth Rs.2 crores. But for this reason stated in the notice of reopening of assessment, there is no discussion whatsoever in that regard in the assessment order, much less .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e assessee. Even though the Learned Departmental Representative, supporting the orders of the Revenue authorities, relied upon the decision of the Delhi High Court in the cae of Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. V/s. DCIT and Anr. (340 ITR 53), considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, we are of the view, that the said decision has no application to the facts of the present case. In this view of the matter, we set aside the impugned order of the CIT(A), and hold that reopening of the assessment in this case is neither legal nor valid, and accordingly allow the grounds of the assessee in its cross objections. 8. In the result, Revenue s appeal is dismissed and assessee s cross objection is allowed. Order pronounced in t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates