TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 409X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the issue of exemption claimed u/s.11 in the light of Form No.10B filed by the assessee for both the assessment years. Also take note of the Writ Petition filed by the assessee before the Hon ble Madras High Court challenging cancellation of registration withdrawn by the CCIT u/s.10(23C)(vi) of the Act and the outcome of the Writ Petition before the Hon ble High Court. Protective addition - addition made to the income of the assessee for the assessment year 2011-12 on the ground that once substantive assessment has been made for the assessment year 2006-07, protective addition made for the impugned assessment year cannot survive - HELD THAT:- Since the assessment for the assessment year 2006-07 has been set aside to the file of the A.O, the Assessing Officer will examine the issue of taxability of particular addition in appropriate assessment years in accordance with law. Accordingly, appeal of the revenue is also set aside to the file of the AO. - I.T.A.Nos.1546 & 1547/Chny/2018, I.T.A.No.1591/Chny/2018 - - - Dated:- 27-10-2020 - Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member And Shri G. Manjunatha, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate For t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed by the appellant would render the entire reassessment proceeding void abinitio. 8. The CIT(A) is wrong in not following the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of GKN Drive Shafts Vs ITO 259 ITR 019 and the law laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras which is also the jurisdictional High Court. II. Claim of Depreciation not allowed 9. The CIT(A) has erred in not allowing the claim of depreciation. 10. The CIT(A) is wrong in not considering the additional grounds of appeal adduced by the appellant on 26th February 2018 before CIT (A) on the claim of depreciation. 11. The CIT(A) has failed to consider the judgement given by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of OIT Vs Medical Trust of Seventh Adventists reported in 84 Taxmaan.com 202 (Madras) and judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT Vs Rajasthan Gujarat Charitable Foundation in CA No.7186 of 2014. III. Wrong addition of unspent accumulation of AY 2005-06 12. The CIT(A) has erred in not deleting the addition of ₹ 6.63 crore as detailed in Para 6 of the assessment order which pertain to unexpended ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15% from accumulation available u/s 11(1)(a) as 15% of the gross receipts and not as 15% of gross receipts less revenue expenditure. This has resulted in lesser amount of free accumulation compared to the quantum as envisaged under law. 20. If the correct methodology had been followed, the taxable income of the appellant would have been much less assumingly even without allowing depreciation and deletion of unutilised accumulation of AY 2005-06 and thus causing undue hardship and denial of justice to the appellant. VI. Retrospective denial of exemption u/s lO(23C)(vi} 21. The assessing officer erred in not granting the alternative exemption u/s 11 of the Act citing rejection of condonation of delay in filing Form 10. The appellant filed its original return of income on bonafied belief that it is entitled to the benefits of section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act. With the retrospective cancellation of registration u/s 10(23C)(vi), the appellant should have been granted the alternative exemption available to it without any further compliance. 22. Without prejudice to the above and in alternative, an appeal against the cancellation of registration granted u/s 10(23C)(vi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AO had denied the benefit of exemption claimed under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act on the ground that assessee is not entitled for any exemption because of cancellation of registration granted by the CCIT vide order dated 14.03.2013. 5. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). Before the CIT(A), the assessee has challenged the reopening of assessment along with denial of exemption claimed under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act. The learned CIT(A), for the detailed reasons recorded in the appellate order dated 28.02.2018, has rejected the ground taken by the assessee, insofar as denial of exemption claimed under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act on the ground that once registration granted has been withdrawn, the assessee cannot claim the benefit of exemption. The CIT(A) also rejected the exemption claimed u/s.11 of the Act on the ground that the assessee has filed Form No. 10 setting apart accumulation of income beyond stipulated date. While doing so, the CIT(A) has followed the appellate order of CIT(A) in ITA No.223/2013-14 for the assessment year 2009-10. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee as well as Revenue are in appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... light of Form No.10B filed by the assessee for both the assessment years. We further direct the learned A.O. to redo the assessments keeping in mind the findings recorded by the Tribunal vide order in ITA No.590 to 594/Chny/2015 dated 04.03.2019 for the assessment years 2006-07 to 2010-11, because the findings given for the earlier years shall have bearing on the assessments of these two assessment years. We further direct the learned A.O to take note of the Writ Petition filed by the assessee before the Hon ble Madras High Court challenging cancellation of registration withdrawn by the CCIT u/s.10(23C)(vi) of the Act and the outcome of the Writ Petition before the Hon ble High Court. 9. As regards the appeal filed by the Revenue challenging the deletion of addition of ₹ 9.36 crores made to the income of the assessee for the assessment year 2011-12 on the ground that once substantive assessment has been made for the assessment year 2006-07, protective addition made for the impugned assessment year cannot survive. Since the assessment for the assessment year 2006-07 has been set aside to the file of the A.O, the Assessing Officer will examine the issue of taxability of part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
