9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 374X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entical question of law and facts are involved in these appeals hence they are decided by this common judgment. 2. By way of these appeals, the appellant has assailed the judgment and order of the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has allowed the appeal preferred by the assessee. 3. This court while admitting the appeals framed the following substantial questions of law : (i) Appeal No. 32 of 2008 1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has not acted illegally and perversely in making observations with regard to grant of exemption under section 10(23C)(vi) when the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has no jurisdiction to decide any application/appeal arising out of order passed eith ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der passed either granting or rejecting exemption under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act by the competent authority ? (iv) Appeal No. 406 of 2011 1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that society is entitled for exemption under sections 11 and 12 of the Act ? 2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income- tax Appellate Tribunal has not acted illegally and perversely in making observations with regard to grant of exemption under section 10(23C)(vi) when the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has no jurisdiction to decide any application/appeal arising out of the order passed either granting or rejecting exemption under section 10(23C) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und three years. In the case of Sambandh Organization v. CIT (supra) relied upon by the learned authorised representative the application under section 12A for registration was filed on August 2, 2002 which was rejected by the learned Commissioner on November 7, 2003. It was held that in view of the provisions of section 12AA it could be said that the impugned order had been passed beyond statutory period deemed to be allowed. Similar view has been expressed by the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Sardarilal Obroi Memorial Charitable Trust v. ITO (supra) referred by the learned authorised representative. 6. Mr. Mahendra Gargieya counsel for the respondent has relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Society for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. The issue is answered in favour of the assessee. 8. The appeal stands dismissed. Appeal No. 32 of 2008 9. In view of the decision in Tax Appeal No. 29 of 2008 the registration will be given accordingly. In that view of the matter, the exemption which is granted under section 10(23C) will be considered on the basis of section 12A registration. The issues are accordingly answered. 10. The appeal stands dismissed. Appeal No. 406 of 2011 11. Similarly in view of the decision of Appeal No. 29 of 2008, the issue is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Department. 12. The appeal stands dismissed. Appeal No. 563 of 2009 13. In view of the decision of Appeal No. 32 of 2008, the issue is answered in f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
