TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 926X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he order of Ld. CIT (A) dated 26.7.2012. The Assessing Officer has passed te penalty order U/S 271(1) (C) of the Income Tax Act on 30.3.2012 in Assessment Year 2007-08. Since the common issues are involved therefore we heard the appeals together and deem it appropriate to dispose of them by this common order. 2. First we take ITA No. 5075, the grievance of the revenue is that Ld. CIT (A) has erred in deleting the additions of ₹ 40,50,850/- and ₹ 39,50,621/- . 3. The brief facts of the case are that assessee is a trust running various educational institutions. It was enjoying of the registration U/S 12 A A (2) of the Income Tax Act. A search U/S 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was conducted on 4th of August, 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the objects of the society cannot be treated as its income. The finding of the Ld. CIT (A) in Assessment Year 2005-06 reads as under : I have considered the impugned assessment order as well as the submissions of the assessee. During the appeal hearing, it transpires that the assesseee-trust had appealed again before the Hon ble ITAT against the order of the CIT, Central, Ludhiana dated 23.12.2010 cancelling the registration effective from 1.10.2004. The assessee provided a copy of order dated 25.05.2012 of the Hon ble ITAT, Delhi Bench E , New Delhi. The relevant extract from the consolidated order for A.Y. 2006-07 and A.Y. 2007-08 which deals with the granting of registration u/s 12AA to the assessee trust by setting aside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... denial registration. Therefore, in our considered view, there is nothing on record on which the assessee can be denied the continuation of the registration. The registration of the assessee trust was cancelled vide order u/s 12AA(3) dated 23.12.2010, by restoring the earlier order dated 31.1.2008 made effective from 1.10.2004. Now the Hon ble ITAT has held that there was nothing on record on the basis of which the registration could be continued to be denied to the assessee-trust as the impugned additions made stood deleted. Reference has been drawn to order dated 30.11.2008 of CIT granting registration to the assessee trust, though made effective from A.Y. 2008-09. In other words, the CIT, Central Ludhiana had afterwards considere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll not be included in the total income of the previous year of the person who received such income. The assessee has fulfilled the conditions provided in Section 11 and 12 of the Income Tax Act. There was no dispute about these proposition even by the Assessing Officer the grievance of the Assessing Officer was that once registration was withdrawn, then , it cannot claim the benefit of Section 11 and 12, otherwise in the regular assessment also the income of the assessee was determined at nil. 7. On due consideration of facts and circumstances and the order of the CIT (A) we do not see any reason to interfere in the finding of Ld. First Appellate Authority (extracted supra) which is based upon ITATs order. 8. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve dismissed the revenue s appeal by confirming the relief granted to assessee, therefore, this ground for cancellation no more survive before us. Secondly, the unaccounted payment of ₹ 8 lacs made to M/s R.K. Engineering Works has also been deleted and no appeal has been filed against the deletion of the addition. Therefore, in our considered view, this ground also does not survive. The third ground of unexplained cash transfer entry has been also decided in favor of the assessee. Therefore, all the issues on which registration was cancelled did not survive. The assessee has been granted registration again on 30.11.2008 although it was made effective from A.Y. 2008-09. The CIT has found the trust and its activities as genuine and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... due consideration of the finding of Ld. CIT (A), we are of the view that it is based on the order of the ITAT and it is similar to that of A.Y. 2005-06. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances, we do not find any reason to interfere in this finding. 10. ITA No. 5077, in this appeal grievance of the revenue is that Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 11. The penalty has been deleted on the ground that quantum addition stands deleted Sub Section III of section 271 (1)(C) provide the computation of penalty. It contemplate that in cases referred to clause (C) in addition to tax, if any payable by an assessee, a sum which shall not be less than but which shall n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
