TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 1272X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has found that the assessee had already obtained approval under Section 10 (23AAA) of the year 1996 and registration under Section 12(A) of the Act subsequently and therefore the entire income would be exempted under Section 10(25)(iii) of the Act. The learned Tribunal, in our opinion, was justified in upholding the exemption in favour of the assessee irrespective of the fact that the provision of the law, under which exemption was quoted, was not correctly mentioned by the assessee. No justification for referring to the provisions under Section 10(23AAA) of the Act in this case. The provisions of Section 10(25)(iii) of the Act, under which the assessee claimed exemption in question, is clearly applicable to the approved superannuation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l of approval once in three years is required to be obtained, which has not been done, hence no exemption is eligible to the assessee-trust. 6.After hearing the rival versions, it was found for a fact that the assessee has already obtained approval u/s 10(23AAA) as back as in 1996. the assessee was also registered u/s 12A of the Act, subsequently. Now the moot question arises for our adjudication is if the assessee is registered u/s 10(23AAA) as well as under Section 12A of the Act, but its entire income is not taxable u/s 10(25)(iii), according to which entire income received by the trustee on behalf of an approved Superannuation Fund is exempt, would the factum of such registration throw the assessee-trust out of the le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... approved under Part-B Schedule-IV of the Act, the exemption claimed by the assessee under Section 10(25)(iii) of the Act could not have been denied by the respondent Revenue authorities. 4. The appeals were admitted on the following Substantial Questions of Law by the coordinate Bench of this Court, on 14.06.2010, and the said questions are quoted below: T.C.A.No.442 of 2010 : (i)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to exemption under Section 10(25(iii)) of the Income Tax Act 1961 to the tune of ₹ 29,73,80,620/- is valid? (ii)Whether on the facts and in the circumstanc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... effect from 01.04.1997 only and whereas the assessee was granted original approval by the Commissioner of Income-Tax in 1996 itself? (iii)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in granting exemption under Section 10(25(iii)) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, even though the assessee should have followed the procedure laid down in Section 10(23AAA) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 to get exemption? 5.We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 6.The said Ruling 2 of Part-B of Schedule IV of the Act is quoted below for ready reference: Approval and withdrawal of approval 2(1) The Principal Chief Commiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Section 10 (23AAA) of the year 1996 and registration under Section 12(A) of the Act subsequently and therefore the entire income would be exempted under Section 10(25)(iii) of the Act. The learned Tribunal, in our opinion, was justified in upholding the exemption in favour of the assessee irrespective of the fact that the provision of the law, under which exemption was quoted, was not correctly mentioned by the assessee. 8. We do not find any justification for referring to the provisions under Section 10(23AAA) of the Act in this case. The provisions of Section 10(25)(iii) of the Act, under which the assessee claimed exemption in question, is clearly applicable to the approved superannuation fund and the assessee's Trus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
