TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 936X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rjar (CIT) ORDER Per Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, A. M. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-III, Jaipur dated 25.07.2016 for A.Y. 2009-10 wherein following two grounds of appeal have been taken by the Revenue. (1) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(A) has erred in allowing the exemption u/s 11 of the Act by holding that the activities of the appellant authority are charitable even though the amended provisions of section 13(8) r.w.1st and 2nd proviso of section 2(15) of the Act are attracted. (2) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) has erred in allowing the benefits of set apart u/s 11(2) of the IT Act, 1961 deleting the addition of ₹ 79,76,39,913/- as unspent amount in spite of the fact that the provisions of section 11(2) r.w.s. 11(3)(c) attracted as assessee was not granted exemption u/s 11. 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessment was originally completed u/s 143(3) of the Act whereby the AO assessed income of the assessee as per normal provisions of the Act denying the exemption claimed by the assessee u/s 11, 12 13 f the Income tax Act. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Act. Regarding validity of action u/s 147 of the Act, the ld. CIT(A) noted that at the time of issuance of notice u/s 148, registration of the assessee u/s 12A had been withdrawn and therefore, the AO was right in taking action u/s 147 as he has reason to believe that benefit u/s 11 was not allowable to the assessee. Regarding disallowance of benefit u/s 11(2) was concerned, the ld. CIT(A) noted that the AO denied the claim of the assessee for the reason that registration of the assessee u/s 12A had been withdrawn by the Commissioner and further the order of ITAT restoring the registration has been opposed by the department and an appeal u/s 260A of the Act is pending for decision before the Rajasthan High Court. The ld. CIT(A) thereafter referred to the decision of ITAT in ITA No.182/JP/2012 dated 30.09.2014 wherein the registration u/s 12A was restored and held that the benefit u/s 11 12 has to be given to the assessee even though the departmental appeal is pending before High Court. Against the said decision of the Ld. CIT(A) the revenue is in appeal before us. 3. The ld. AR submitted that the matter is clearly covered by the decision of Hon ble ITAT in ITA No. 380, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ength and the assessee was held eligible for exemption u/s 11 12 of the Act. 5. The Ld. DR supported the order of the AO and stated that the department is in appeal against the earlier orders of the Coordinate Bench before the Hon ble Rajasthan High Court. At the same time, he fairly agreed that the matter is covered by the decision of the Coordinate Benches referred supra. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. The issue of eligibility of the assessee to claim exemption under section 11 and 12 of the Act has already been examined by the Coordinate Bench for the impunged assessment year in the context of original assessment proceedings completed u/s 143(3) of the Act. Apparently, the notice u/s 148 was issued on 29.03.2014 and thereafter reassessment proceedings were completed on 23.03.2015 much before the order was pronounced by the Coordinate Bench on 04.01.2016 and the AO was therefore not having the benefit of considering the decision of the Coordinate Bench where the assessee was held eligible for exemption under section 11 and 12 of the Act. Further, in the context of subsequent assessment years, this Bench has recently ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to prepare Master Plan for traffic control and management, devise policy and programmes of action for smooth flow of traffic and matters connected therewith; and to do all such acts and things which are necessary for the furtherance of the objects for which the authority is established. Further, as per the provisions of section 55 of JDA Act, for the purpose of discharging the statutory functions, The Jaipur Region Development Fund is created to which all money received by the authority is credited including amount of contribution to be made by the State Government, such other money as may be paid to the authority by the State Government, Central Government or any other authority or agency by way of grant, loans advances or otherwise, 90% share of tax recovered on land and building situated within the Jaipur Region, income derived from premium on second and subsequent sale of vacant land, income from levy on vacant land, all fees, costs and charges received by the Authority under this Act or any other law for time being in force, all money received by Authority from the disposal of land buildings and other property movable and immovable and other transactions including lease mone ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er Development Authority and of ₹ 3,82,10,322 to Jaipur Metro Rail Corporation Limited that these expenses would be admissible as application of income if it was to be considered exempted under section 11, 12 and 13 and as the benefit of section 11 is not admissible, the sum paid to these two institutions as grant would not be admissible and hence added back to assessee s income. Similar is the position in respect of other disallowances except for an amount of ₹ 1,57,56,523 which has been allowed in the earlier years and disallowance thereof confirmed by the ld CIT(A). It is thus clear that the Revenue has not disputed any of these expenses as application of income (except ₹ 1,57,56,523 which was already allowed in earlier years) for want of fulfilment of any of the conditions specified under section 11, 12 and 13 of the Act. Regarding applicability of section 13(8), we have already held above that in view of proviso to section 2(15) not applicable in the case of the assessee, provisions of section 13(8) would not be applicable. In light of above, we do not see any reason to interfere with the order of the ld CIT(A). The assessee is held eligible for exemp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
