9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 267X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the issue is pending before the Hon ble High Court. Under the above facts and circumstances, we find no infirmity in the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) and accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. - I.T.A. No. 2824/Chny/2018 - - - Dated:- 1-6-2022 - Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member And Shri G. Manjunatha, Accountant Member Appellant by : Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate Respondent by : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT ORDER PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 17, Chennai, dated 05.07.2018 relevant to the assessment year 2009-10. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of sec.11 exemption to the assessee. 7. The CIT(A), in any event, ought to have considered the contentions of assessee in the proper perspective and also the judicial precedents and held that prima facie, the corpus donation does not form part of the taxable income of the assessee and thus allowed the appeal. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an educational trust and filed the return of income on 09.10.2010 admitting Nil income. While completing the assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ Act in short] dated 30.12.2011, the Assessing Officer denied the benefit of exemption under section 11 of the Act and treated the corpus donation received of ₹.2,92,75,200/- as income of the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ltd. (1997) 94 Taxman 271 (SC), the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the corpus donation statutorily stands excluded from the income of the trust under section 11(1)(d) of the Act and that the inclusion of the same as income of the Trust is an obvious and patent mistake and therefore warrants rectification of the order passed on 30.12.2011. It was further submitted that as per section 11(1)(d) of the Act, the amount of corpus donation per se does not form part of the total income and hence it is not a debatable issue and does not form part of the taxable income of the assessee and prayed for allowing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oordinate Benches of the Tribunal set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and reinstated the assessment order. Thereafter, the assessee filed a petition under section 154 of the Act for deleting the amount of corpus donation to the tune of ₹.2,92,75,200/- from the total income. The petition filed by the assessee under section 154 of the Act was dismissed by the Assessing Officer and the reasons given are reproduced hereinabove. On appeal, by following the decisions of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Volkart India 82 ITR 50(SC) as well as in the case of CIT v. Hero Cycles (P) Ltd. (1997) 94 Taxman 271 (SC), the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by observing as under: 4. Decision: I have considered the observat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the provisions u/s. 154. The claims made by the appellant involve fresh determination of facts and statutory interpretation once again. In view of the above, I have no hesitation in holding that the Assessing Officer rightly rejected the petition filed u/s. 154 by the appellant. The appellant fails on this ground. 6.1 From the above, we find that the rectification petition filed by the assessee under section 154 of the Act is a debatable issue and therefore, it cannot be considered at this stage. That apart, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the issue is pending before the Hon ble High Court. Under the above facts and circumstances, we find no infirmity in the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) and accordingly, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
