Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2016 (5) TMI 709

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rved on it and the working said to be provided to the assessee by the CIT(Appeals) was also not furnished. Admittedly, the CIT(Appeals) passed the order on 26.03.2015. Therefore, from the date of issue of letter and the date of passing the order, the time limit available was only 9 days. If the CIT(Appeals) dispatched the letter dated 17.03.2015 by post, then the same would have been received after two or three days. Then, the available time would be only 5 or 6 days. If for any reason, the letter could not be served on the assessee within two or three days, then the time limit available to the assessee for furnishing objection would be reduced proportionately. Therefore, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that even assuming for arg .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... peals) found that the assessee- Sangam was established for the benefit of a particular caste and accordingly found that the assessee-Sangam is not eligible for exemption under Section 11 of the Act. Referring to the order of the CIT(Appeals), more particularly para 4.1, the Ld.counsel submitted that the CIT(Appeals) is not correct in saying that the aim of the assessee-Sangam is not solely for education. According to the Ld. counsel, the object of the Sangam is primarily for education. The Sangam is also pursuing institutional activity apart from the primary object of education. Therefore, the assessee-Sangam is eligible for exemption under Section 11 of the Act. Since the primary object is for education, the assessee-Sangam is also eligibl .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er was not conferred on the CIT(Appeals). The CIT(Appeals) is expected to adjudicate the issue raised by the assessee in the grounds of appeal. Unfortunately, according to the Ld. counsel, the CIT(Appeals) has not discussed anything about the issue of depreciation and disallowed the claim of the assessee under Section 11 of the Act. Therefore, according to the Ld. counsel, the CIT(Appeals) is not justified. 5. On the contrary, Sh. P. Radhakrishnan, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that no doubt, the assessee claimed depreciation on capital asset which was disallowed by the Assessing Officer. On appeal, the CIT(Appeals) found that there was violation of Section 13(1)(b) of the Act, hence, he found that the assessee is not el .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... us, according to the Ld. D.R., the Assessing Officer has not considered the violation of Section 13(1)(b) of the Act. Therefore, he had no occasion to examine whether the assessee is eligible for exemption under Section 11 of the Act or not. This omission on the part of the Assessing Officer was rectified by the CIT(Appeals). Such an exercise of his power is permissible under the scheme of the Act. Therefore, according to the Ld. D.R., it is not correct to say that the CIT(Appeals) has exceeded his jurisdiction in denying exemption under Section 11 of the Act, especially, when the issue before him was grant of depreciation on the capital asset. 6. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... eived after two or three days. Then, the available time would be only 5 or 6 days. If for any reason, the letter could not be served on the assessee within two or three days, then the time limit available to the assessee for furnishing objection would be reduced proportionately. Therefore, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that even assuming for argument sake, the letter dated 17.03.2015 was served on the assessee, the time given to the assessee for filing objection is not sufficient enough. Therefore, the matter needs to be reconsidered by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, the orders of the lower authorities are set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to examine the matter afresh in the light of the objection raised by t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates