9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 226X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case are that from the examination of balance sheet, the Assessing Officer found that during the financial year 2008-09, the assessee instate has given advance to staff members of Rs. 1,07,03,784/-. Similar advance was given to others totalling to Rs. 2,28,41,789/-. Thus, the total advance given was Rs. 2,28,41,789/-. The Assessing Officer required the assessee to explain justification for giving such high amount as advance. The assessee was required to give particulars of recovery of the same. The assessee was required to submit specific details in respect of Rs. 15,10,000/- advance given to Shri Durlabh Mahto and Rs. 8,78,905/- advance given to Shri Bhim Vishwakarma. The assessee was required to file relevant ledger copy of the accounts. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee has applied 85% of its income in their object even in the earlier years and the same is accepted by the income tax Department for the assessment year 2008-09 and earlier assessment years. Since the assessee has applied more than 85% of its income, the balance income is not subject to any further restriction as specified in the provisions of section 10(23C)(vi) and section 11(2) of the Act. 5. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the CIT(A) deleted the addition. 6. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of lower authorities and materials available on record. In the instant case, the assessee claimed its entire income as exempt u/s.11 & 12 of the I.T.Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer assessed the to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1961 for the F.Y. 2011-12 onwards. In the present case vide F.No.64 of 2006 dated 23.5.2007 the National Commissioner for Minority Education Institutions had issued a certificate to the assessee wherein it has been mentioned that Xavier Institute of Social Services, Purulia Road, Ranchi, Jharkhand managed by the Xavier Institute of Social Service, Ranchi exclusively is a minority education institution within the meaning of section 2(g) of the National Commissioner for Minority Education Institutions 2004. This certificate had also declared that this institution is a minority educational institution covered under Article 30 of the Constitution of India. It is also to be noted that in the assessee's case the assessment orders for A.Ys 2008-09 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... after nothing that assessee is entitled to exemption u/s.10(23C)(vi) the addition made under this head is difficult to be sustained in appeal and, therefore, this addition is directed to be deleted. Accordingly, this ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed." 8. Before us, ld D.R. relied on the order of the Assessing Officer. 9. On the other hand, ld A.R. supported the order of the CIT(A). 10. We find that no specific error in the order of the CIT(A) could be pointed out by ld D.R. No material was brought before us to show that the approval granted to the assessee u/s.10(23C)(vi) of the Act or Section 12AA of the Act was withdrawn by the department. In the above circumstances, we do not find any good reason to interfere with the order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as been claimed. It has also been contended that the income of a charitable trust as contemplated by section 11(1)(a) and Section 10(23)(C) of the Act is required to be computed not in accordance with those provisions, but in accordance with the normal rules of accountancy where depreciation is always taken into account for finding out the real income. It has also been contended that the amount of depreciation debited to the accounts of the charitable institution has to be deducted to arrive at the income available for application to charitable and religious purposes. 14. The ld CIT(A) called for a remand report from the Assessing Officer. Ld CIT(A) noted that Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sheth Manilal R.amchordas Vish ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the head 'advance payment to Shri Durlabh Mahto' to the tune of Rs. 4,66,000/-. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that advance payment to Shri Durlabh Mahto cannot be treated as application of income for educational purposes. 19. The Assessing officer observed that the assessee institute had given Rs. 4,66,000/-- to Shri Durlabh Mahto during the year under consideration. In absence of any details filed by the assessee, the Assessing Officer treated this amount to be spent not for the educational 'Purpose and added back to the total income of the assessee. 20. On appeal before the CIT(A), ld counsel of the assessee argued that the society has engaged Mr. Durlabh Mahto as its lawyer for assisting it with various legal matters and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
