9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 171X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red view that the CIT (A) has rightly deleted the addition of ₹ 80,00,000/- by holding that the assessee society is eligible for benefit of sections 11 & 12. Addition being the amount accumulated in earlier years u/s 11(2) - since exemption under sections 11 and 12 of the Act treating the assessee as AOP has been declined accumulated income has been treated as surplus for assessment year 2010-11 - Held that:- CIT(A) after thrashing the issue in detail and by relying on the various decisions rendered by the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal on the issue in question reached the conclusion that when the assessee is held to be eligible for benefit of sections 11 and 12, the assessee society cannot be treated as AOP. So, in these circumstances, since the assessee is held to be eligible for getting benefit under sections 11 and 12 of the Act, the time is available with it for use of accumulated fund of earlier years, hence ld. CIT (A) has rightly deleted the addition. So, Ground No.2 is determined against the Revenue. Disallowance of claim of the assessee qua accumulation of surplus under section 11(2) - since the benefits of sections 11 and 12 are not available to the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... #8377; 1,37,37,011/- made on account of disallowing the carry forward of accumulation under various heads as these funds have not been utilized till the end of 31.03.2010 which is evident from the statement of accumulation of funds by the assessee on the ground that the exemption u/s 11 12 be denied on the previous point and the assessee be treated as AOP. 3. Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A) was correct in deleting the addition of ₹ 1,18,98,495/- made on account of surplus (excess of income over expenditure) as the assessee was disqualified for availing benefits of Section 11 12 of the Act. 4. Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A) was correct in deleting the addition of ₹ 8,28,531/- as there was unexplained negative cash balance appearing in cash book of assessee in the months of December and February. 5. The order of Ld. CIT(A) be cancelled and the order of the AO be restored. 2. Briefly stated the facts necessary for adjudication of the controversy at hand are : Assessee society being registered with the Registrar of Societies, Uttar Pradesh, has been granted registration und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng benefits under sections 11 12 of the Act in the preceding as well as succeeding years. It is also not in dispute that the assessee society has purchased the flat bearing property House No.27, Single Storey, THA, Sector 4, Ghaziabad for a sale consideration of ₹ 70,00,000/- on 18.01.2010, paid ₹ 4,90,000/- as stamp duty and registration charges of ₹ 10,060/- as legal fee and deed writer charges. It is also not in dispute that the perusal of the sale deed, available at pages 27 to 57 of the paper book, shows that the property in question has been purchased in the name of St. Thomas Orthodox Church (Society) Regd. through its Chairman, Fr. Shaji Mathews. It is also not in dispute that in the sale deed in question, PAN : AABTS8844F of assessee society has been mentioned. It is also not in dispute that in the appellate proceedings, remand report, available at pages 131 132 of the paper book, was called by ld. CIT (A). 8. In the backdrop of the aforesaid undisputed fact, when we examine aims and objects of the assessee society highlighted by AO at page 7 of the assessment order viz. conducting dispensaries, schools, hostels, meeting halls, centers of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Act treating the assessee as AOP has been declined accumulated income has been treated as surplus for assessment year 2010-11. Ld. CIT(A) after thrashing the issue in detail and by relying on the various decisions rendered by the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal on the issue in question reached the conclusion that when the assessee is held to be eligible for benefit of sections 11 and 12, the assessee society cannot be treated as AOP. So, in these circumstances, since the assessee is held to be eligible for getting benefit under sections 11 and 12 of the Act, the time is available with it for use of accumulated fund of earlier years, hence ld. CIT (A) has rightly deleted the addition of ₹ 1,37,37,011/-. So, Ground No.2 is determined against the Revenue. GROUND NO.3 11. AO made for the addition of ₹ 1,18,98,495/- on account of disallowance of claim of the assessee qua accumulation of surplus under section 11(2), again on the same ground that since the benefits of sections 11 and 12 are not available to the assessee society, the same is treated as AOP. Again we are of the considered view that when the assessee is held to be eligible for exemption under se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
