TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 902X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sertion of proviso to Section 2(15) but before 1st April 2016, when business activities are carried by the assessee trust "in the course of actual carrying out of such advancement of any other object of general public utility", the benefit of Section 11 read with Section 2 (15) cannot be declined. Nothing, therefore, turns on the assessee carrying out, even if that be actually so, activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business etc as long as these activities are carried out in the course of actual carrying out of advancement of any other object of general public utility. The planned development of cities and towns is an object of general public utility, and that is an object consistently followed by the assessee in all its activities. For this short reason alone, the stand of the authorities below must be held to be unsustainable in law. A lot of emphasis has been made by the learned Departmental Representative on the fact that nothing, or very little, has been done by the trusts for the poor people but what this argument overlooks is that the assessee trust is not granted registration under section 2 (15) for implementing poverty alleviation programs or doing other act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es of discharging duty of carrying out the provisions of this Act (i.e. Punjab Towns Improvement Trust Act, 1922) in any local area (i.e. and the area within which a trust has been created for the purposes of carrying out the provisions of the Act) . One common issue which requires to be adjudicated in these appeals is whether the manner in which these assessees are conducting their activities is such that the very basic character of 'general public utility', as set out in Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is lost. As a corollary to this hypothesis being tested, it is also required to be examined whether even if the assessees are held to be pursuing an object of 'general public utility', on the common facts of these cases, the work being done by the assessee ceases to be for 'charitable purposes' due to first proviso to Section 2(15) which lays down that the advancement of any other object of general public utility shall not be a charitable purpose, if it involves the carrying on of any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business ..irrespective of the nature of use or application, or retention, of the income from such activity . As the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pinion, the matter requires to be remitted to the Tribunal to adjudicate the issue regarding the nature of activities of the appellant trust whether they are in the nature of charitable within the meaning of Section 2(15) of the Act in respect of assessment years in question or not, keeping in view the arguments raised by the learned counsel for the appellant-assessee and to pass fresh orders relating to assessment proceedings thereafter in accordance with law. Accordingly, the impugned orders passed by the Tribunal in all the appeals are set aside and the matter is remanded to the Tribunal to decide the same afresh in the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties in accordance with law. Needless to say, anything observed hereinbefore shall not be taken to be expression of opinion on the merits of the controversy. Sincere efforts shall be made to decide the matter expeditiously. As a result, all the appeals stand disposed of 3. The background in which the above issue arises in these appeals can be appreciated from a look at the relevant material facts leading to these appeals before us. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is held that the trust is genuinely engaged in the activities of 'general public utility'. Registration applied for, therefore, is granted to the aforesaid trust with effect from 01.4.2005 in terms of the provisions of Section 12AA(b)(i) of the Income Tax Act. The trust is entered at Sr No. 222 of the relevant register maintained in this office. The grant of registration shall not, by itself, confer on the trust any right to claim any part of its income as exempt, and the claim for exemption, if any, shall be examined by the AO on merits at the time of assessment for each year. 8. The assessee, vide his income tax return filed on 27.09.2010, claimed the entire income to be exempt under section 11 of the Act. This return was picked up for scrutiny assessment. In the course of the scrutiny assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee trust is set up, under the Punjab Towns Improvement Act 1922, (PTIA, in short) by the Government of Punjab and that the principal objective of the trust was to being about improvement in the town by the means set out under section 22 to 26 of the PTIA. The Assessing Officer, however, required the assessee to explain a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n that the learned Commissioner had granted registration to the assessee trust and held it to be pursuing objects of 'general public utility'. The assessee concluded by submitting that the assessee is a non-profit organization, owned and controlled by the State Government formed for the development of urban areas of Hoshiarpur and is not doing any commercial business, and, hence entitled for exemption under section 11 and 12 of the Income Tax Act . 9. None of these submissions, however, impressed the Assessing Officer. 10. The Assessing Officer was of the view that the aim of the assessee trust is acquisition of land, to develop it and sell it in the shape of plots, flats and commercial booths, after calling the applications from public with some registration fees . He noted that these plots, shops and flats are sold at market rates. The Assessing Officer was of the view that these activities cannot be treated as advancement of any other object of general public utility . The Assessing Officer further observed that, these activities of the trust regarding construction of colonies, building of flats/shops is only to earn profits . While he did not dispute that tru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r not is : (a) Is the object of the assessee one of general public utility ? (b) Does the advancement of the object involve activities bringing in moneys ? (c) If so, are such activities undertaken, (i) for profit, or (ii) without profit ? He further observed that it was observed by the Supreme Court that if (a) and (b) are answered affirmatively, and cl. (i) is also answered affirmatively, the claim for exemption collapses and the benefit of s. 11 will not be available to the entire income. However, if such activity is undertaken without profit motive, the object will be charitable purpose within the meaning of s. 2(15). Applying these tests to the facts of this case, the Assessing Officer concluded as follows; In the case of the assessee, the main object of the assessee is to earn profit and bringing in money. Application with certain amounts are called for, and, after public draw/auction, the flats/plots and commercial booths are sold. Income and expenditure account furnished by the assessee show the complete picture of the activities undertaken by the trust. In its reply also, the assessee trust has intimated that the Hoshiarpur Improvement Trust has launched three schemes, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with this amendment, this definition was as follows: Charitable purpose includes relief of the poor, education, medical relief, and the advancement of any other object of general public utility: 15. Vide Finance Act, 2008, the words preservation of environment (including watersheds, forests and wildlife) and preservation of monuments or places or objects of artistic or historic interest) , were added and, on a more relevant note, a new proviso (i.e. fist proviso) was added to this provision, carving out an exception in the cases of 'advancement of any other object of general utility', and, by the immediately following Finance Act 2009, there was yet another proviso (i.e. second proviso) introduced to carve out an exception from the exception itself. In essence, the effect of these provisos was that even when an assessee was pursuing 'a charitable purpose' in the event of advancement of any other object of public utility' it would cease to be for charitable purposes if it involves (a) carrying on an activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business; or (b) rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business, for a cess or fee or a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under the 'any other object of public utility'. Under the principle of mutuality, if trading takes place between the persons who are associated together and contribute to a common fund for the financing of some venture or object, and in this respect have no dealings or relations with any outside body, then the surplus returned to such persons is not chargeable to tax. Therefore, where industry or trade associations claim both to be charitable institutions as well as mutual members, these would not fall under the purview of s. 2(15) owing to the principle of mutuality. However, if such organizations have dealings with the non-members, their claim for charitable institution would now be governed by the additional conditions stipulated in proviso to s. 2(15). 3.2 In the final analysis, whether the assessee has for its object 'the advancement of any other object of general public utility' is a question of fact. If such assessee is engaged in any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business or renders any service in connection to trade, commerce or business, it would not be entitled to claim that its object is for charitable purposes. In such a case, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or as subservient to the main objective of 'general public utility', the carrying on of bonafide activities in furtherance of such objectives of 'general public utility' cannot be hit by the proviso to s. 2(15). By the Finance Act 2015, these two provisos also stand substituted, with effect from 1st April 2016, a new proviso to Section 2(15). This new proviso is as follows: Provided that the advancement of any other object of general public utility shall not be a charitable purpose, if it involves the carrying on of any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business, or any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business, for a cess or fee or any other consideration, irrespective of the nature of use or application, or retention, of the income from such activity, unless- (i) such activity is undertaken in the course of actual carrying out of such advancement of any other object of general public utility; and (ii) the aggregate receipts from such activity or activities during the previous year, do not exceed twenty per cent. of the total receipts, of the trust or institution undertaking such activity or activitie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , even when the assessee is engaged in the activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business etc. and such activity is undertaken in the course of actual carrying out of such advancement of any other object of general public utility it is excluded from the scope of charitable purposes only when the aggregate receipts from such activity or activities during the previous year, do not exceed twenty per cent of the total receipts, of the trust or institution undertaking such activity or activities, of that previous year . In other words, even when the activities are in the course of advancement of any other object of general public utility, but in the nature of trade, commerce or business etc, the proviso seeks to exclude it only when the threshold level of activity is not satisfied. Whether such a statutory provision stands the legal scrutiny or not is another aspect of the matter, and that is none of our concern at present anyway, it is beyond doubt that the new proviso, with effect from 1st April 2016, seeks to exclude, from the scope of section 2(15), the situations in which even in the course of pursuing advancement of any objects of general public utility when any activi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roceed with the normal rule of presumption against retrospective operation. (Emphasis, by underlining, supplied by us now) 22. Since in the orders of the authorities below, some references have been made to the judicial precedents and the CBDT instructions in the context of the legal position when the words not involving the carrying on any activity for profit [i.e. CBDT instruction no. 1024 dated 7th November 1976 and Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgments in the cases of Lok Shikshan Trust v. CIT (supra) Indian Chamber of Commerce Ors v. CIT (supra)], it may also be appropriate to briefly deal with the relevant developments. The CBDT instruction no. 1024 dated 7th November 1976 was issued in the light of the two Supreme Court rulings referred to above and it stated as follows: BOARD'S INSTRUCTION NO. 1024 DT. 7TH NOVEMBER, 1976 7th November 1976 Sec. 2(15) of the IT Act, 1961, defines charitable purposes as under: Charitable purpose includes relief of the poor, education, medical relief and the advancement of any other object of general public utility not involving the carrying on of any activity for profit. 2. In the definition of c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... officers working in your charge. You may also kindly direct them to carry out a review of the completed cases in the light of the pronouncement of the Supreme Court and take remedial action wherever called for and feasible. A report indicating the result of the review may please be sent to the Board by 1st Jan., 1977 without fail. 23. However, the judicial views relied upon in the above instructions (i.e. views expressed in Indian Chamber of Commerce decision and the majority views, expressed by Hon'ble Justice Khanna and Hon'ble Justice Gupta, in the case of Lok Shikshan Trust) did not meet the approval of a larger bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Surat Art Silk Clothes Manufacturers Association [(1980) 121 ITR 1 (SC)]. While doing so, Hon'ble Justice Bhagwati, in his order representing majority views, observed as follows: There is, however, one comment which is necessary to be made whilst we are on this point and that arises out of certain observations made by this Court in Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust's case (supra) as well as Indian Chamber of Commerce's case (supra). It was said by Khanna J. in Sole Trustee, Loka Shiksh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... haritable purpose, but, if it is the latter, the charitable character of the purpose would not be lost. (Emphasis, by underlining, supplied by us now) 24. It was in this backdrop, and shortly after the above judgment was delivered by Hon'ble Supreme Court was rendered, that the words not involving the carrying on any activity for profit were dropped from Section 2(15). 25. In view of the above discussions, the reliance placed by the authorities below on the CBDT instruction no. 1024 (supra) and on Hon'ble Supreme Court decisions in the cases of Indian Chamber of Commerce (supra) and Lok Shikshan Sansthan (supra) is devoid of any legally sustainable merits. These decisions are no longer good law, the relevant provision in the context of which the decisions were given does no longer exist on the statute, and the judicial precedent, which the CBDT instruction has interpreted, has already faded into oblivion. 26. It is, however, important to bear in mind the fact that, going by the circular no.372 dated 8th December 1983 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes explaining the amendments made by the Finance Act 1983, dropping of the words not involving the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has inserted a new sub-s. (4A) in s. 11 of the IT Act to provide that the provisions of sub-s. (1) of that section relating to exemption of income derived from property held under trust for charitable or religious purposes; or of sub-s. (2) thereof relating to accumulation of setting apart of such income for application to such purposes; or the connected provisions of sub-ss. (3) and 3(A) of the said section will not apply in relation to profits and gains of business. This provisions will apply irrespective of whether the profits and gains are derived from a business carried on by the trust or institution or from a business undertaking which is held in trust for such purposes. An exemption has, however, been made in relation to profits and gains of business in the following cases:- (a) where the business is carried on by a trust wholly for public religious purposes and the business consists of printing and publication of books or publication of books or the business is of a kind notified by the Central Government in this behalf in the Official Gazette; (b) the business is carried on by an institution wholly for charitable purposes and the work in connection with the business ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng profits and gains of business, unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the trust or, as the case may be, institution, and separate books of account are maintained by such trust or institution in respect of such business. 29. Explaining this amendment in law, the CBDT circular no. 621 dated 19th December 1991 [(1992 195 ITR (St) 154], read with circular no 642 dated 15th December 1992 [(1993) 199 ITR (St) 7] stated as follows: CBDT circular no. 621 dated 19th December 1991 [(1992 195 ITR (St) 154 @165] 15.8 In order to bring exemption of charitable or religious trusts in line with the corresponding provisions in section 10(23C)(iv) or (v) of sub-section (4A) of section 11 has been amended to permit trust and institutions to carry out business activities if the business activities are incidental to the attainment of its objective. The charitable or religious trust will no longer lose complete exemption from income-tax. However, the profits and gains from such business activity will be subjected to tax. CBDT circular no 642 dated 15th December 1992 [(1993) 199 ITR (St) 7 @7] In partial modification to para 15.8 (as extra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aritable purpose and, therefore, the income is not exempt under s. 11(1)(a). In case of a trust falling under any of the first three heads of charity, viz., relief of the poor , education and medical relief it may engage in any activity for profit, and the profits would not be taxable if they were utilized for the primary object of the trust. In other words, the business carried on by them is incidental or ancillary to the primary object, viz., relief of the poor, education and medical relief. To illustrate, a charitable hospital holding buildings on trust may run a nursing home. The profits of the nursing home owned and run by the trust will be exempt under s. 11(4), because the business is carried on by the trust in the course of the actual carrying out of the primary purpose of the trust. The concept of profits to feed the charity , therefore, is applicable only to the first three heads of charity and not the fourth. It would be illogical and, indeed, difficult to apply the same consideration to institutions which are established for charitable purposes of any object of general public utility. Any profit-making activity linked with an object of general public utility would ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he nature of 'profit making activities' a little later, but, suffice to say, that on the admitted facts of this case, so far period prior to 1st April 2009 is concerned and for the reasons set out above, the benefit of Section 11 read with Section 2(15) could not have been declined at all. 32. Turning once again to the amendments brought on the statue with effect from 1st April 2009, we have to understand that there are the two mutually exclusive situations in which business activities are carried out by the assessee trust - one, in which the object of 'general public utility' will only be a mask or a device to hide the true purpose which is trade, commerce, or business etc [referred to in the CBDT circular no. 11 dated 19th December 2008 issued at the point of time when first proviso to Section 2(15) was introduced]; and - second, in which any activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business etc are undertaken in the course of actual carrying out of such advancement of any other object of general public utility , [insertion of new proviso to replace first and second proviso to section 2(15)- effective 1st April 2016 i.e. assessment year 2016-17]. As fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld to be unsustainable in law. 33. We must, however, also deal with the fundamental allegation of the revenue authorities that the assessee has sold residential and commercial units and residential and commercial lands just to earn profit 34. This profiteering, as learned Departmental Representative puts it, is the core issue in these appeals. As we deal with this aspect of the matter, we may reproduce the following written submissions filed by learned Departmental Representatives: A: In all improvement trust cases It is submitted that the learned counsel namely Shri Y.K. Sood, CA and Shri J.S. Bhashi, Advocate have argued these appeals . My counter-submissions are as under :- It is submitted that there are two situations i.e. (a) Where the assessee's are rendering general public utility services and in rendering such services and due to exigency of rendering such service some surplus (not profit) results such assessee are not hit by the proviso to section 2(15) even if rendering of such services partake the character of trade, commerce or business or rendering services in relation to any trade commerce or business. (b) Where the assessee have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... do charity by activities which may embark upon any trade commerce or business or rendering any service in the nature of trade, commerce or business and not that income accrues due to the exigency of undertaking general public utility activities. It is further submitted the judgement in the case of City Ind. Dev. Corp. of Maharashtra v. ACIT reported at S. No.2 is project specific and further it has been held by the Hon'ble Tribunal Mumbai 'C' Bench that assessee is an agent of the Government and does not hold any independent entity whereas the trusts are a corporate body and have perpetual succession and common seal and can sue and be sued in its name as per section 3 of the Punjab Town Improvement Trust Act, 1922. In view of this difference also, the said judgment is not applicable to this case. It is further submitted that the trusts do not get any grant in aid from the state government. The Trusts have to first do business like a builder to earn money i.e. it purchases (acquires) property and divides the same into plot or build the same and sells the plot or the buildings which it raises both by way of reserve price (residential buildings or plots) and c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... usts have income from other sources as contemplated in section 68 of the Act. This shows that the government does not give to Trusts what it itself has assured the Trusts in the Act. It may further be mentioned that trusts are not agent of the State as if it were so, there would not have been any provision as section 70 in the Act which empowers the state government to attach the rents and other income of the trust. Ait is submitted that the factum of the trusts making exorbitant profit is best elucidated from the way the Improvement Trust Pathankot has sold a plot of land to Income Tax Department. The price it had informed to the department in 2011 was ₹ 5,03,30,800/- but in the year 2014, the price for the same plot was intimated at ₹ 10,43,65,946/-. Thus in a period of three year and a half, it had more than doubled the price of its plot measuring 60.35 marlas. An affidavit of Shri Charan Dass, ACIT, Pathankot is enclosed in support of this fact. If this is the way the Trust does charity by way of developing cities and town then certainly, it amounts to robbing Peter to pay Paul and surely such an activity cannot be clothed as charitable activity. In view of abo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In this judgement, the Hon'ble Court has held :- that the petitioner was engaged in certifying the varieties of seeds grown by the clients who finally carry out trade or commerce in certified seeds grown by the clients who finally carry out trade or commerce in certified seeds. Thus, petitioner had rendered its services not directly to farmers but was rendering its services directly to its clients/agents who are engaged in trading of the certified seeds with profit motive. Activities of the petitioner had not indicted involvement of any charitable activity or advance of any other object of general public utility. Functioning of the petitioner was akin to a corporate profit earning service provider. The Trust also sells plots and building for commercial purposes to persons who do business for their own gain and likewise the Trust cannot be said to be doing any activity of charitable name as its activities fall, struco sensu, in the same domain as the activities of the Andhra Pradesh State Seed Certificate Agency (supra) fall. Its activity of selling plot and building for residence to persons though for the allottee it may not for commercial purpose but the way the T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring of Trusts' cases are also pressed into service in these appeals. In view of the above submissions, it is prayed that the issue may kindly be decided in favour of the revenue. 35. While dealing with the profit motive allegation of the revenue authorities, it is essential to appreciate the difference that profit on sale does not essentially and necessarily imply profit motive in activities of the assessee trust. What is important is the motive or predominant object of the activities. As we do so, we may only make a note of the following observations made by a coordinate bench decision in the case of Devki Devi Foundation Vs DIT [(2015) 56 taxmann.com 56 (Delhi)]: 29 The soul of charity is benevolence and generosity towards others and the community at large. Of course, it is important as to what are the activities of a charitable institution but what is even more important is what is the predominant motivation for such activities. No activity, by itself, could be charitable in nature when it is dominated and triggered by economic greed. There is no difference in what a soldier and a mercenary does, both use bullets to defend their interests, but while a sold ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Land and Allotment of Plots) Rules, 1983, there is a formulae on the basis of which the price is worked out. Learned Departmental Representative does not dispute that aspect but he alleges profit motive embedded in this formula as shown by adjustments for (a) conservancy changes for 5 years @ 10% per month per acre; and (b) provision for unforeseen charges @ 15% of total reserve price. Firstly, even if this allegation about presence of the two elements only to maximize the profit be taken as correct, it is important to bear in mind the fact that this is not the presence of profit element in the activities which vitiates charitable character of the activities but it is the absence of restrictions on making profits which vitiates the charitable character of the activities. In the Indian Chamber of Commerce (supra), which has been relied upon by the Assessing Officer and referred to in CBDT Instruction no. 1024 (supra), it has been stated thus: Ordinarily profit motive is a normal incident of business activity and if the activity of a trust consists of carrying on of a business and there are no restrictions on its making profit, the Court would be well justified in assuming in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... epresentative, it is like robbing Peter to pay Paul. We are unable to share these perceptions of the learned Departmental Representative. An object of general public utility does not necessarily require that the activities or the beneficiaries must be funded or subsidized by the State. As long as broader public cause is served, whether by the State funding or by efficient regulation of the affairs, it is an object of general public utility. It is also important to bear in mind that costs of proper development of area are also costs incidental to the plots and units sold by the assessee and, therefore, these two things should not be seen in isolation. As for the specific instance of inordinate hike in prices within a short period of three and a half years, we are unable to comment upon the same as full facts relating thereto are not on record. That aspect, however, for the detailed reasons set out above, does not affect our conclusion anyway. 39. As for the decision of the coordinate bench in the case of the Punjab Urban Development Authority v. CIT [(2006) 103 TTJ 988 (Chandigarh)] , it is a case in which there is no mention about selling the residential units and plots at th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee, we see no reasons to take any other view of the matter in this case. Respectfully following our decision in the said case, we uphold the grievance of the assessee in this case as well and delete the impugned disallowance of ₹ 3,28,23,979. The assessee gets the relief accordingly. 45. In the result, ITA No. 18/Asr/2015 is also allowed in the terms indicated above. 46 We now take up the appeals filed by Amritsar Improvement Trust. 47. In ITA No. 476/ Asr/2011, the Assessing Officer has challenged correctness of the order dated 20th June 2011 in the matter of assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2006-07. In ITA No 477/ Asr/2011, the Assessing Officer has challenged correctness of an identically worded order dated 20th June 2011 in the matter of assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2007-08. 48. Grievances in these appeals, as pressed before us and in substance, are that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance of exemption under 11 r.w.s. 2(15) of ₹ 32,16,640 for the assessment year 2006-07 and of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the assessee. The very foundation of the impugned revision order thus ceases to hold good in law. We uphold the grievance of the assessee and quash the impugned revision order. 57. ITA No. 200/Asr/2010 is thus allowed. 56. In ITA No 336/Asr/2014, the assessee has challenged the order dated 13th March 2014 passed by the learned CIT(A) in the matter of assessment under section 143(3) of the Act for the assessment year 2009-10. 57.. Grievance of the assessee, in short, is that the learned CIT(A) erred in declining exemption under section 11 read with section 2(15) on the ground that the assessee was not entitled to exemption under section 11 as the assessee was not covered by the provisions of Section 2(15). 58. Learned representatives fairly agree that whatever we decide in the ITA No. 496/Asr/ 2013 will apply mutatis mutandis on this appeal as well. As we have decided that appeal in favour of the assessee, we see no reasons to take any other view of the matter in this case. Respectfully following our decision in the said case, we uphold the grievance of the assessee in this case as well and direct the Assessing Officer to grant relief accordingly. The issue regarding e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee fairly accepts, these issues will be no more than academic. 69. Learned representatives fairly agree that whatever we decide in the ITA No. 496/Asr/ 2013 will apply mutatis mutandis on this appeal as well. As we have decided that appeal in favour of the assessee, we see no reasons to take any other view of the matter in this case. Respectfully following our decision in the said case, we uphold the grievance of the assessee in this case as well and direct the Assessing Officer to grant relief accordingly. The issue regarding certain disallowances, given the fact that the assessee is entitled to exemption under section 11 in respect of the same as well, is infructuous. 70. ITA No 417/Asr/2013 is also thus allowed in the terms indicated above. 71. We now take up ITA No. 760/Asr/2014 i.e. appeal filed by the Improvement Trust, Moga. 72. By way of this appeal, the assessee has challenged correctness of the order dated 17th October 2014 passed by the CIT(A) in the matter of assessment under section 143(3) of the Act for the assessment year 2011-12 73. Grievance of the assessee, in short and in substance, is that learned CIT(A) erred in declining exemption under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
