9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 1130X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o persons specified u/s 13(3) was excessive - Held that:- Said disallowance of ₹ 5.40 lac was deleted by the Tribunal in earlier years on the basis that the gross receipt has increased substantially in comparison to the earlier years but the payment of remuneration is the same and therefore, if the payment of remuneration was held to be allowable in the earlier year, the same cannot be said that it is excessive in the present year. The Learned D.R. of the Revenue could not point out any difference in facts and therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of CIT(A) on this issue. Ground No. 4 is rejected. Non deduction of tds - addition deleted by CIT(A) that since the registration granted to the assessee u/s 12A has been r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r of Income tax (Appeals)-II, Kanpur has erred in law and on facts in allowing exemption u/s 11 12 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the assessee without appreciating the fact that the Ld. CIT-I, Kanpur has withdrawn the registration u/s 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, granted to the assessee on the basis that the assessee was carrying on its educational activities on commercial basis and income derived therefore was being diverted for the personal uses of the members of the society. 2. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Kanpur has erred in law and on facts in not appreciating the fact that restoration of registration u/s 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by Hon'ble ITAT was not accepted by the department and the sam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n pages 16 to 19 of the paper book. 4. We have considered the rival submissions. We find that in assessment year 2008-09 also, the grounds raised by the Revenue in its appeal were similar. In that year, it was held by the Tribunal that since the Tribunal order, as per which the registration granted to the assessee u/s 12A has been restored by the Tribunal, is still valid and therefore, the income of the assessee has to be computed as per section 11 12 of the Act. The Tribunal also held in that year that the income of the assessee should be assessed under the provisions of section 11 12 of the Act and if the assessee is able to establish that 85% or more of the income of the assessee has been utilized for the purpose of assessee insti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not deducted and the same was deleted by CIT(A) that since the registration granted to the assessee u/s 12A has been restored, the disallowance is not justified particularly when the provisions of section 13 are not applicable. We fail to understand the basis adopted by CIT(A) to delete this disallowance because when the disallowance was made by the Assessing Officer for the reason that TDS was not deducted from interest payment, such interest payment cannot be considered as an expenditure for computing the income of the assessee and therefore, the assessee has to show utilization of 85% of such increased income after making disallowance for non deduction of TDS. We, therefore, reverse the order of CIT(A) on this issue and restore that of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
