9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 1894X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... does not call for any interference. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed. - ITA No.2178/PUN/2016 - - - Dated:- 2-11-2018 - MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM AND SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM For the Appellant : Shri S.B. Prasad, CIT-DR For the Respondent : Shri P.B. Sandbhor Shri S.N. Doshi ORDER PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM : This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of CIT(A)-10, Pune, dated 15-07-2016 for the Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Briefly stated, relevant facts include that the assessee is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950. Assessee is also registered u/s.12A of the I.T. Act. Assessee filed the return of income decl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x Act............ 4. Aggrieved with the said decision of CIT(A) in the year under consideration, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal with the following grounds : 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) was correct in holding that the provisions of section 13(1)(c) and 13(2)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 were not attracted in this case despite the fact that payments were made on account of advertisement to prohibited persons? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) was correct in holding that the assessee was allowed to claim exemption u/s.11 of the I.T.Act, 1961 despite the fact that the payments were made to prohibited persons as de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee s own case for A.Y. 2008-09. Before us, Revenue has not placed any material on record to demonstrate that the facts in the year under appeal are distinguishable to that of earlier years. In view of the aforesaid facts and following the same reasoning of the Tribunal in assessee s own case for A.Y. 2008-09, we find no reason to interfere with the order of Ld. CIT(A). Thus, the grounds of Revenue are dismissed. From the above, it is evident that the Tribunal granted gave relief to the assessee on the similar issue of applicability of provisions of section 11 r.w.s. 13(1)(c) of the Act. It is undisputed fact that the Advertisement expenditure were always paid by the assessee to the said SBC. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
