9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 1332X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndary School and Rose Mary High School and contended that the monetary limit of Rs.1 crore as prescribed u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) read with Rule 2BC of the Act should be applied in respect of the gross receipts of each of the educational institutions and not on the aggregate receipts of both the educational institutions. Assessee also pointed out that the entire gross receipt cannot be assessed to tax without allowing eligible deduction against said income. We find that the above stated facts have not been properly considered by CIT(A) while passing the impugned order as the claim of the assessee was disallowed on the ground that the assessee is neither registered u/s 12A/12AA nor approved/notified under the provisions of Section 10(23C)(iiiad) o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there was no representation on behalf of the assessee despite repeated notices issued to the assessee through RPAD as well as through e-mail on the e-mail ID given by the assessee in Form-36. The notices issued through registered post AD has been received back with the postal remarks that on repeated visits the door is found locked. Accordingly, the Bench proposed to hear and dispose off this appeal ex-parte. 3. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. Under the facts and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming disallowance of the exemption u/s 10(23C)(ad) and/or 10(23C)(vi) 1.1 Under the facts and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in disallowing the expenditure Incurred for running the education institute / schools, af ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act. The CPC while processing the return u/s 143(1) of the Act disallowed the claim of exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act on the ground that the gross receipt of the assessee exceeds Rs.1 crore and consequently the entire gross receipts was assessed to tax. The assessee challenged the order of CPC before CIT(A) but could not succeed. The Ld. CIT(A) has upheld the assessment made by the CPC by disallowing the claim of exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act on the ground that the gross receipt of the assessee exceeds Rs.1 crore as prescribed monetary limit u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act. 5. It is pertinent to note that the assessee has specifically raised the point before CIT(A) that it runs two sch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... disallowed on the ground that the assessee is neither registered u/s 12A/12AA nor approved/notified under the provisions of Section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act and therefore, the claim of the assessee was denied as the total receipts are more than Rs.1 crore as prescribed under the said provisions of Section 10(23C)(iiiad) read with Rule 2BC of the Act. However, CIT(A) has not disputed the fact that the assessee is running two separate educational institutions and therefore, in our considered view the gross receipts of each of the educational institutions has to be separately considered for the purpose of allowing the claim of exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act. In any case the total income of the assessee ought to have been assessed as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
