9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 177X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly for the assessment years 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2015-16 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'A' Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal). 2. The appellant-Revenue has filed these appeals by raising the following substantial question of law for consideration: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that assessee is entitled for exemption u/s 10(21) of the Act by treating the assessee as Association when the said provision mandates exemption only to the association and not to the institutions? 3. We have heard Mr.J.Narayanasamy, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant-Revenue and Mr.G.Baskar, learned counsel for the respondent. 4. The assessee, Interna ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue's appeals and this is how the Revenue is before us by way of the present appeals. 8. After elaborately hearing the learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the materials placed on record, we find that there is no error in the common order passed by the Tribunal in dismissing the Revenue's appeals. The Tribunal rightly took note of the statement of facts which have been furnished by the assessee, wherein the assessee had stated that the Assessing Officer was of the view that the assessee is not a Charitable Organization and that the activity done by them does not qualify as charitable purpose. 9. This view was objected to by the assessee by contending that it is engaged in activities of education and scientific rese ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the assessee's own case taken by the Tribunal in (i) ITA.No.2309/Mds/2005 dated 26.05.2006 for the assessment year 1997-98, (ii) ITA.No.12/Mds/2007 dated 19.11.2007 for the assessment year 1998-99, (iii) ITA.No.1523/Mds/2008 dated 29.06.2009 for the assessment year 2000-01 and (iv) ITA.No.317/Mds/2009 dated 16.07.2009 for the assessment year 2004-05, wherein the Tribunal has held that the assessee is eligible for exemption under Section 10(21) of the Act. It was further contended that the Assessing Officer failed to follow the decisions of the Tribunal in the assessee's own case, alleging that the orders have not attained finality. 11. The correctness of these submissions was tested before the CIT(A) as well as the Tri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ersed the finding of the Assessing Officer who treated the assessee acclaimed to have been a contractor. 13. Mr.J.Narayanasamy, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant would vehemently contend that the provisions of Section 10(21) of the Act is applicable only to research association and not to institutions. The Assessing Officer treated the assessee as an institution while granting approval under Section 35(1)(ii) by the competent authority as well as by the Directorate of Income Tax (Exemption) (DITE) and not as an association and therefore, the assessee cannot claim the benefit under Section 10(21) of the Act. 14. The above submission cannot be countenanced for more than one reason. Firstly, ever since the inception ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
