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

2007 (1) TMI 102

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he Revenue is aggrieved by an order dated October 19, 2004, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench "C" in I. T. A. Nos. 4497 and 4498/Del/2000 relevant for the assessment years 1996-97 and 1997-98. 2 The only question that arises is whether the assessee is entitled to the benefit of sections 10(22A) and 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 3 Learned counsel for the Revenue has taken us through the assessment order. It appears that the assessee entered into two agreements with M/s. Escorts Heart Institute and Research Center (EHIRC). Though the date of two agreements is not mentioned, we have been told (and it appears to be correct) that both the agreements were entered into on April 1, 1989. In terms of these agreements .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... fore the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and succeeded before him. The Revenue then appealed to the Tribunal which dismissed the appeal and gave the benefit of the exemption to the assessee. The Revenue accepted the order passed by the Tribunal and did not challenge it any further 8 Thereafter, for the assessment year 1998-99 the Assessing Officer again denied the exemption to the assessee and that view was upset by the Tribunal. Against the order passed by the Tribunal for that assessment year, that is, 1998-99, the Revenue preferred an appeal which we have dismissed today since no substantial question of law arises. 9 For the middle two assessment years, that is, 1996-97 and 1997-98, the Assessing Officer again decided again .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... has to be considered on its own merits. 15 We are in agreement with this but when there is absolutely no change in facts, a mere change of opinion wifi not entitle the Revenue to pick and choose the assessment year in which an appeal should be filed. The principle of consistency, which was propounded by the Supreme Court in Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT [1992] 193 ITR 321 has been followed by this court in several cases. 16 Since there is no change in the facts and circumstances from the assessment year 1988-89 till 1997-98, we are of the view that the Revenue must follow a consistent pattern and when it has granted the benefit of exemption under sections 10(22A) and 11 of the Act, it cannot be permitted to change its opinion merel .....

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