TMI Blog2007 (8) TMI 8X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1997-98. 2. Admit. 3. The following substantial questions of law arise for consideration: - (a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in negating the assessee's claim for accumulation of unspent income in the sum of Rs.8,16,799/- for the assessment year 1997-98? (b) Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- received by the assessee from WAFM for holding a national convention for farmers was not a capital receipt in the hands of the assessee but was its income under Section 2(24)(iia) of the of the Income Tax Act, 1961? 4. Filing of paper books is dispensed with. 5. The Assessee is a society registered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ified 8 objects for which accumulation was sought. In the present case the Assessee had sought accumulation in respect of all the objects of the trust. 10. We do not think that this is the correct way to distinguish a decision of a superior court. The Tribunal has first to see what is the law laid down and then apply it to the facts of a given case. What has been done by the Tribunal in this case is that it has noted that the facts of the cited case is different and has not discussed the law laid down. This is not the correct approach for determining whether a decision is distinguishable or not. 11. Our attention has been drawn to the Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Hotel and Restaurant Association, (2003) 261 ITR 190. On a reading o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ." 13. In view of the law laid down, it is held that the Tribunal erred in denying the claim of the Assessee for accumulation of a sum of Rs.8,16,799/- as unapplied income in terms of Section 11(2) of the Act. Question (a) is accordingly answered in the negative, in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue. 14. As regards question (b), the contention that is urged by learned counsel for the Assessee is that it had received an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- from WAFM for the purposes of holding a national convention for farmers. According to the Assessee the amount was received by way of advance for holding the convention but the convention could not held in that year and was only held in the subsequent year and the amount of Rs.2,00, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
