9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 971X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al of the order of the AO and in particular, the quoted portion thereof, would convince us that the AO has travelled far beyond the scope of the inquiries before him and has breached all propriety of judicial discipline. AO has held that the Tribunal was not correct in granting deemed registration to the Petitioner. He has, in fact, criticized the Judgment of the Supreme Court on the ground that such Judgment notes a Division Bench Judgment of the High Court but not a larger Bench Judgment. Assessing Officer does not indulge into such bravado in future. Firstly, it was not within his scope to decide whether the decision of the Tribunal was correct or incorrect. Far more serious is his conduct of criticizing the Supreme Court Judgment. The entire hierarchy of judicial set up would be disturbed if a quasi judicial authority or for that matter, any Court or subordinate Judicial Officer were allowed to disregard questioning the correctness of the decision of a higher authority, forum or Court. The impugned orders are set aside. Since the Assessing Officer has not carried out the directions of the Tribunal to examine the Petitioner's claim of exemption under Sections 11 and 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee not being registered under the Bombay Public Trust Act or any other issue in this regard. Accordingly, we direct the Assessing Officer to allow the exemption under section 11 and 12 of the Act to the assessee in the years under appeal. 12. The Ld. Authorised Representative for the assessee time and again stressed that the income should be assessed at Nil in the hands of the assessee as it was entitled for the exemption under section 11 and 12 of the Act since complete details were filed before the Assessing Officer, which were verified by him. He also pointed out that the details have been looked into by the Assessing Officer at length and no discrepancy has been found in the said details. However, in the interest of justice, we are of the view that the Assessing Officer has failed to consider the conditions of section 11 and 12 of the Act while denying the said exemption to the assessee in all the years. So for the limited purpose of verification, we restore this matter to the file of Assessing Officer who shall verify the expenditure claimed by the assessee as to whether it falls within the scope of section 11 and 12 of the Act and recompute the balance income, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2.2016 has held that all other questions of law are left open, meaning thereby question of law raised in appeal by C.I.T. has not been decided, but left open, hence it cannot be said that judgement of this Court has merged with the judgement of Supreme Court on the above question of law, which was decided by this Court in Society for the Promotion of Education, Allahabad (Supra). 11. In view of full Court Judgment in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Muzafar Nagar Development Authority, Income Tax Appeal No.348 of 2008 , the question formulated above is answered against Assessee. 8.2 It is further seen that the Hon'ble Tribunal in its said order dated 30.11.2017 has given the directions for verification of expenditures claimed by the assessee and whether these claimed expenses fall within the ambit of Section 11 and 12 of the Act after granting the assessee deemed registration u/s 12AA of the Act to the assessee vide the said order. However, in this context it is seen that the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in its decision in the case of CIT Meerut Vs A. R. Trust, Meerut, ITA No.112 of 2013 dated 04.09.2017, has held that, the Tribunal has no jurisdiction in law t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the period subsequent to 23.05.2008 which implies that the assessee is not entitled to the benefit u/s 11 for the year under consideration. 9. In view of above discussed facts and circumstances, it is clear that assessee in spirit is not a charitable society and is working for the benefit of its members in clear violation of Section 13(1)(c) and not working for providing the medical relief to the needy patients at affordable costs. Assessee thus exists for the purpose of profit, as discussed in various para 7.3 above. In light of above discussion and in light of the fact that assessee did not possess registration u/s 12AA during A.Y. 2009 10, assessee society therefore cannot be considered as a charitable society and benefit of sec 11 12 cannot be allowed to the assessee and hence, assessee is hereby assessed as an AOP. 10. In view of the above facts and discussion, assessee being deemed to be registered u/s 12A has violated the provisions of Section 13(1)(c) r.w.s. Section 13(3) of the Act for the A.Y. under consideration and therefore, it is not eligible for grant of exemption u/s 11 and 12 of the Act for A.Y. 2009 10. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
