9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 192X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re a party in the said proceedings pending before their lordships. Nor there is any stay order against us in both these appeals. Faced with this situation, we hardly see any reason to disturb the learned lower authorities findings declining the assessee s sec. 10(46) exemption claim for want of it s statutory notification. - SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For the Appellant : Shri Prathmesh Borkar For the Respondent : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari, CIT (DR) ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : These assessee s twin appeals I.T.A.Nos. 560 561/PUN./2023, for assessment years 2016-2017 and 2017- 2018, arise against the National Faceless Appeal Centre s [in short the NFAC ] Delhi s as many Din ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Constitution of India. Ref - Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority v. Dy. DIT 2014 TaxPub(DT) 4751 (Bom-HC) : (2015) 273 CTR 0317. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned assessing officer has grossly erred to tax the amounts collected by PMRDA in the capacity of Special Planning Authority in the hands of PMRDA, albeit the fact that a Special Planning Authority is merely a trustee of the funds which are collected by it on behalf of the Government of Maharashtra. The true owner of the funds collected is in fact the Government of Maharashtra and the said receipts cannot be taxed in the hands of PMRDA. Ref : Kishanchand Lunidasing Bajaj v. CIT, [1966] 60 ITR 500 (SC). Poona Electric Co. Ltd. v. CIT, [ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the assessee has made a specific demand for rehearing. This act of the assessing officer is in contravention to all known principles of natural justice and equity and as such the assessment order is liable to be quashed for being bad in law. 8. The appellant craves the leave to add, amend, modify, alter, and delete any of the grounds of appeal during the course of appellate proceedings. 3. The first and foremost identical issue that arises for our apt adjudication in both these cases is that of the assessee s sec. 10(46) exemption claim. Learned counsel could hardly dispute that the assessee has not been a notified authority u/sec.10(46)(c) of the Act which forms the precise reason for the Assessing Officer as well as the NFAC to decline ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ird substantive ground to the NFAC s for afresh appropriate adjudication as per law preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing. It is made clear that in case the assessee fails to appear, lead and prove all necessary facts before the NFAC in the prescribed mode at it s own risk and responsibility, our remand instant directions herein shall stand automatically vacated. 5. The impugned delay of 5 days each herein is condoned as per assessee s solemn averments in light of Collector, Land Acquisition vs., MST Katiji [1987] 167 ITR 471 (SC) having settled the law long back that all such technical aspects must make a way for the cause of substantial justice. 6. These assessee s twin appeals I.T.A.Nos. 560 561/ PUN./2023 are partly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
