9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 680X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Year 2011-12. 2. The Revenue has proposed the following substantial questions of law for the consideration of this Court : "(A) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Appellate Tribunal has erred in directing the Assessing Officer to restrict the disallowance of accumulation instead of deciding whether the proceedings u/s 263 of the Act was rightly invoked by the CIT(E) ? (B) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in not deciding the issue of proceedings initiated under Section 263 of the Act on the ground that order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) rws 147 was erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue ? ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was reopened under Section 147 of the Act 1961 by issuing a notice under Section 148 of the Act 1961. The reassessment proceedings came to be finalized under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act 1961 on 6th December 2016, determining the total income at Rs.NIL after disallowing Rs. 8,82,707=00 on account of the expenditure made for the purpose of a car in the name of the trustee, namely Rev.Bishop Gregory Karotemprel. 4. The record further reveals that the CIT (Exemptions) invoked its revisional powers under Section 263 of the Act 1961. The CIT(E) noticed that the Assessing Officer had disallowed the expenditure of Rs. 8,82,707=00 on account of the accumulation under Section 11(1)(a) of the Act 1961 in respect of the car purcha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cer had assessed the income under the normal provisions and the benefits entitled to the Trust were denied. 8. Ms.Bhatt would further submit that the decision of the appellate tribunal is erroneous and deserves to be quashed and set-aside. 9. In the last, Ms.Bhatt clarified that the tax effect involved is Rs. 11,92,860=00, which is below the prescribed monetary limited under the Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 8th August 2019 issued by the CBDT. However, as the case falls under the exception clause as provided in paragraph 10(c) of the Circular, this Appeal has been filed by the Revenue. 10. Having heard Ms.Bhatt, the learned senior standing counsel appearing for the Revenue, and having gone through the materials on record, the only questio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 60,391/-. With the assistance of Ld. representatives, we have gone through the judicial pronouncements relied upon by the Ld. counsel as cited above. We have noticed that the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Fr. Mullers Charitable Institution has held as under : "12. We are in respectful agreement with the views expressed by the Bombay High Court as well as Delhi High Court for violating Section 11(5) of the Act and the entire income of the respondent - Trust cannot be assessed for the tax." Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT(E) vs. Audyogik Shikshan Mandal has held as under : "Section 13 read with Section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Charitable or religious trust - Denial of exemption [S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
