TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 692X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... knowledge, ability and experience. It, therefore, appears that A.O. followed the orders for earlier years, in which the assessee did not produce documents regarding approval of the Governing Body. Further assessee explained that Governing Body passed resolution in earlier year on 04.06.2008. A.O. did not bring any evidence on record as to how the salary paid to these persons with reference to their qualification was excessive or unreasonable. A.O. did not make any comparison, but, appears to have followed order for earlier years. In earlier year, the matter have been decided in favour of the assessee as is noted by the CIT(A) in his Order because the same salary have been considered in earlier years. CIT(A) also referred to decisions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Chairman of the assessee society) and Ms. Sharda Sharma, Principal/Administrator (wife of Chairman of the assessee society). (ii) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the fact the salaries paid by assessee to these specified persons were excessive in comparison to the normal practice followed for other employees, thereby committed violation within the meaning of provisions of section 13(1)(c) of the Act by providing benefits to the above specified persons. 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that assessee society is registered under section 12A of the I.T. Act, 1961, vide Registration Dated 16.02.2005 w.e.f. 11.02.2004. The society is also r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee could not produce any documents regarding approval of Governing Body of the society regarding the appointment and remuneration of both these persons. The salary paid to these specified persons are excessive in comparison to the normal practice followed for other employees, therefore, exemption under section 11 was denied and the income was computed in the status of AOP. The total income was computed at ₹ 1.37 crores. 3. The assessee challenged the findings of the A.O. before the Ld. CIT(A) and the same facts were reiterated. It was further submitted that both these persons were appointed through Resolution passed under the General Body Meeting dated 04.06.2008 and are devoting full time to the institution t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... O. noted that salary have been paid to two persons who were specified persons under section 13(3) of the I.T. Act. A.O. also noted that in previous assessment years, the assessee could not produce any documents regarding approval of the governing body of the society including the appointment and remuneration of both these persons. The A.O. also found that salary paid to these persons are excessive in comparison to the normal practice followed for other employees. The assessee, however, submitted before Ld. CIT(A) that both these persons were appointed through the resolution passed under the General Body Meeting dated 04.06.2008. It was also submitted that both these persons have devoted full time to the educational institution to the best o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
