9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (7) TMI 993X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... On the return of the income filed by the assessee. The Assessing Officer determined the taxable income at ₹ 49,53,102/- denying exemption under Section 11, 12 and 13 of the Income Tax Act on the ground that the appellate/assessee contrary to the provisions of Section 11(5) of the Act has invested the part of its funds in three financial institutions known as Cholamandalam investment and Finance Company Limited, Arrow Beach Marine Firms Private Limited and V.G.P. Aqua Firm Limited. On the ground that the investment made in the aforesaid three financial institutions is contrary to Section 11(5) of the Act, the Assessing Officer declined to grant exemption. Accordingly, the assessee was assessed to the tax. 3. Before the Assessing Of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appeal memo several substantial questions of law are raised by the assessee. At the time of hearing the learned counsel appearing for both the parties submit that substantial questions of law raised by the assessee are to be re-framed. Accordingly, by consent of both the parties, the substantial question of law are re-framed as hereunder:- Whether the order of assessment denying exemption without considering the explanation offered by the assessee in regard to the mis-representation of the investee company thereby making the assessee to invest under wrong notion, is bad in law contrary to the Judgment of the Delhi High Court in case of Director if Income Tax (Exemption) Vs. Agrim Charan Foundation reported in 253 ITR 593? 6. Hav ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent year investments are made in three financial institutions and they were not only aware of the Income Tax laws and that they were misrepresented by those three investee companies. This explanation is offered in the year 1998. 8. The Delhi High Court on 14.08.2007 has ruled that if the assessee is mis-lead by the misrepresentation by those two companies, the assessee is entitled to claim exemption under section 11(1)(d) of the income Tax Act. In this case there was no material before the Assessing Officer to reject the explanation offered by the assessee. The assessee was mis-represented by the investee company. In the absence of contra material when the assessee is doing charitable work, the conduct of the assessee shows that it had n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
