9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 1389X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Officer was bound to dispose of the same by a speaking order. We find that the CIT(A) has rightly considered the decisions of Hon ble Supreme Court (supra) and the Hon ble High Court Gujarat [ 2003 (10) TMI 17 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] , therefore, no interference is called for Exemption u/s 11 - Application of income by a charitable society - Uttaranchal legislature passed an Act called the ICFAI University Act, 2003, permitting ICFAI to set up a University in Uttaranchal - HELD THAT:- If the objections of the assessee are considered in the light of the factual matrix in their true perspective there remains no doubt that the payment being made to the sponsor society is on account of the MOU entered into between the sponsor society and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the case u/s. 148 were based on proper reasoning and adequate facts. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts by deleting the disallowance of ₹ 718.49 Lakhs by observing that The sponsor society is also a society registered u/s.12 AA of the I. T. Act, 1961. Donations by one society to another having similar objects are considered a legitimate application of income by a charitable society. Even if we view the sponsor society, especially in view of the facts that is has an objective of imparting higher education and is creating infrastructural facilities for the same for use of the University. 3. Facts relating to ground No.1 show that the assessment has been reopened on the instructions f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der :- 19. In view of the aforesaid decisions of the Hon ble Court, and the self evident fact of the A. O. not passing any speaking order in disposing the assessee s objections against the notice u/s 148, it is held that the subsequent assessment order is bad in law and deserving of being quashed. 9. Before us the DR strongly supported the findings of the Assessing Officer and placed reliance on the decision of the Hon ble High Court of Madras in writ petition No.1019 of 2017. It is the say of the DR that the SLP filed by the assessee in this case has been dismissed by the Hon ble Supreme Court. The DR supplied the copies of the order. 10. We have carefully considered the orders of the author ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt and also to go through the gamut of appeal, the second appeal before Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and then reference/tax appeal to the High Court. Viewed in this light, it appears to me that the rigour of availing of the alternative remedy before the Assessing Officer for objecting to the reassessment notice under section 148 has been considerably softened by the apex court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. s case [2003] 259 ITR 19 in the year 2003. In my view, therefore, the GKN Drivesharfts (India) Ltd. s case [2003] 259 ITR 19 does not run counter to the Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. case [1961] 41 ITR 191 (SC) but it merely provides for challenge to the reassessment notice in two stages, that is, (i) R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion bench. Moreover there being no direct judgment of the jurisdictional High Court of Delhi we are inclined to follow the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court and Hon ble Gujarat High Court as discussed here in above. 14. We find that the CIT(A) has rightly considered the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court and the Hon ble High Court Gujarat, therefore, no interference is called for. Ground No.1 is accordingly dismissed. 15. Coming to ground No.2, facts on record show that the facts of the case are that the Uttaranchal legislature passed an Act called the ICFAI University Act, 2003, permitting ICFAI to set up a University in Uttaranchal. As per this act all the movable, and immovable properties acqui ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the infrastructure created is being used by the University, entirely for its objects as laid down in the ICFAI University Act of 2003. On account of this property, the ICFAI society has paid back to the bank an installment of ₹ 201,57,750/- and this expenditure has been reimbursed to the society by the University out of its development fund. Furthermore, as the society had invested a sum of ₹ 5.17 crores out of its own funds in the setting up of the University upto 31.3.2008, this entire amount has been refunded to the society by the University during the course of the year. The University had held that this repayment to the society is solely on account of the properties which are in its de facto control/ownershi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
