9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 408X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ests of the revenue. As noted above, CIT(E) simply took recourse to the provisions of Section 263 of the Act because the AO had acted in a hurried and hasty manner. It is not in dispute that in the previous AYs, i.e., 2006-07, 2007-08, 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12, the Tribunal has allowed the appeal of the respondent/assessee pertaining to the issue concerning denial of exemption under Section 11 of the Act on account of purported violation of provisions of Section 13(1)(c), read with Section 13(3) of the Act. Although Appellant says that the appeal was not preferred to this court against the order of the Tribunal because of low tax effect, it was not stated why was the revenue not alert, as it claims now, in exercising powers u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... These registrations were obtained for AYs 2010-11 to 2012- 13. 5. In the period in issue, the respondent/assessee had filed its return of income on 27.09.2012, wherein it declared its income as nil . 5.1 Along with the return, the respondent/assessee had also filed a report as required under Section 12A(b) in the prescribed form i.e., Form 10B. 5.2 This form was accompanied by a balance sheet, income and expenditure account and the relevant schedules. 6. It is after considering the material on record that the Assessing Officer (AO) framed an order dated 12.11.2014 under Section 143(3) of the Act. In sum, the AO accepted the return filed by the respondent/assessee, whereby it had declared its income as nil . 7. As noted here ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal in assessee's own case for assessment year 2007-08, 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12, has allowed the appeal filed by the assessee on the issue of denial of exemption u/s 11 due to violation of the provisions of section 13(1)(c) read with section 13(3) of the IT Act. It is also the submission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that when the Assessing Officer has taken a possible view, merely because the ld. CIT(E) does not agree with the view taken by the Assessing Officer, the same cannot be a ground for invoking the jurisdiction u/s 263. 10. We find merit in the above argument of the ld. counsel. A perusal of the order of the Tribunal for assessment year 2006-07, copy of which is placed at pages 1 to 16 of the paper book, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was held to be not justified. [Emphasis is ours] 10. Mr Abhishek Maratha, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of the appellant/revenue, says that since there has been a flip-flop in the previous years as to the nature of the amount provided by Mr Mohinder Singh, this was a fit case for exercise of powers under Section 263 of the Act. 11. The Tribunal, as is evident from the extract set forth hereinabove concerning the impugned order, quite correctly, recorded that the AO had considered the response of the respondent/assessee and then taken a view in the matter. 12. For exercise of powers under Section 263 of the Act, it is well established that, not only the order passed by the AO would have to be catego ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
