9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 1317X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - - Dated:- 23-10-2017 - Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Judicial Member And Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member Appellant By : Shri Srinivasan, Advocate. Respondent By : Shri B.R. Ramesh, CIT (D.R) ORDER Per Shri Vijay Pal Rao, J.M. : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dt.31.3.2017 of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Bangalore arising from the order passed under section 201(1) 201(1A) of the Act for the Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds : 14. The order of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) is opposed to law and facts of the case. 3. The assessee is a autonomous body constituted under Central Silk Board Act, 1948 primarily for pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee receives annual grant only from Government of India based on budget proposal from the Ministry of Textiles. Such grants are distributed out of consolidated fund of India. Therefore the employees of the assessee are covered by the Govt. of India Pay Allowances Rules, Conduct Rules and other rules as applicable to central government employees as per Rule 28 of Central Silk Board Rules, 1955. He has further submitted that its employees are eligible for pension on same scale as central government employees. The accounts for the assessee are actually audited by CAG of India therefore, the perquisite value of unfurnished accommodation provided by the assessee to its employees is required to be worked out in accordance with Sl.No.1 of Tab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ontended that an organization that receives grants from government cannot be deemed to be government for the purpose of Rule 3. Further the assessee has significant financial as well as administrative autonomy. The learned Departmental Representative has relied upon the decision of the co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal dt.4.7.2014 in the case of Central Food Technology Research Institute Vs. ITO (TDS) in ITA No.1607 to 1611/Bang/2013 and submitted that an identical fact the Tribunal has held that an autonomous body constituted under the statute receiving grants from the government cannot cannot be treated as government or state for the purpose of Rule 3 of the IT Rules. He has relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 6. We have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
