TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 169X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der in this year. Ld. CIT(A) should have followed the predecessor order on the issue, rather than relying the consequential order passed by A.O on wrong appreciation of facts. Since, this issue is no longer required to be adjudicated, as it was crystallised in earlier year in favour of Assessee, we have no hesitation in setting aside the order of A.O and CIT(A) on this issue and allow the grounds of Assessee - appeal allowed - decided in favor of assessee. - ITA No. 1446/Hyd/2016 - - - Dated:- 3-5-2017 - SMT P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Assessee : Shri S. Raghunathan For The Revenue : Smt. Suman Malik ORDER PER B. RAMAKOTAIAH, AM This is an appeal by Assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... than permitted by approval of Min of External Affairs. Ld. CIT(A) held that reasoning of A.O is not justified. The order of Ld. CIT(A) on this issue is as under: 14. I have considered the f acts on record and the submissions of the AR. Though the letter f rom DARE specif ied that admissions to the school will be open only to the children of non-Indian members of the institute, this condition was modified by the MEA letter which permitted admission of children of Indian nationality subject to certain limits. The AR has submitted that the list of students of the school had been submitted to MEA every year (in accordance with the letter f rom DARE) and the MEA had not raised any objections with regard to the student mix. In view of the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s whether the denial of exemption u/s 11 of the Act to the assessee on the allegation of charging capitation fee over and above the fee prescribed under the Act is sustainable .. 3.2 There after, the ITAT went on to examine the issue and the matter was restored to the file of A.O to examine whether there was any fees fixed for Assessee, so that the collection of donation can be considered as violation. In the consequential order passed by A.O for A.Y 2011-12, A.O gave a finding that there is no prescribed fee for admission of student in the school and accordingly AO has accepted the assessee contentions. Surprisingly, even though the other issue of violation of Min. of External Affair s approval by admitting more students than permit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtment of Agricultural Research and Education / Ministry of External Aff airs guidelines and bring to tax the capital f ee in cases where the number of Indian students exceed the permitted limits. 2. Without prejudice to Ground No. 1, on the f acts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the Appellant did not follow the terms and conditions laid down by DARE / MEA without considering the f act that the School has regularly been submitting all the required inf ormation in the prescribed f ormat to the MEA and there has never been any query raised by the MEA so far on the submissions made. 5. Ld. Counsel while submitting that the consequential order of the A.Y 2011-12 is pending adjudication before Ld. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee collected capitation fee while admitting the students. On both the issues the Assessee had agitated before CIT(A) in earlier year and CIT(A) in the orders dated 27-08-2014 has clearly held that when the controlling Ministry has no objection to the student mix, the objection of A.O. to the practice of admitting Indian students is held to be not justified. On this finding of the Ld. CIT(A), there is no appeal before the ITAT. As already stated earlier and extracted above, the only issue for adjudication before the ITAT in A.Y 2011-12 was the issue of collection of capitation fee, which was restored to A.O to examine a fresh whether there is any prescribed fee under any regulations. The A.O in consequential order however accepted that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
