TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 326X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncy' qua the above state law vis- -vis tax law as per Article 251 of the Constitution of India. The foregoing legal maxim also does not apply here. The clinching fact that emerges here is that assessee's 'hundi' receipts in cash from donors are not revenue items but capital receipts only. The relevant provisions of the 'Endowment Act' duly makes it clear that they are corpus donations which nowhere go against the provisions of tax law. We therefore see no reason to sustain the learned lower authorities' action treating the assessee's hundi receipts embedded with specific purpose of corpus donation u/s. 11(1)(d) of the Act are not entitled for exemption being revenue receipts. We thus direct the Assessing O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. CIT (Appeals) and the Ld. AO erred in understanding that the nature and taxability of Corpus Donations is determined by the Income Tax Act 1961 and not by other statutes. 4. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Tirupati erred in not allowing the plea of the appellant to file the Form 10 for accumulation at the appellate stage. The Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in not considering the various judicial precedents laid in this behalf. 5. Any other ground may be urged with the kind permission of the Hon'ble Tribunal at the time of hearing . 3. Both the learned representatives have taken us to the CIT(A)'s lower appellate discussion upholding the Assessing Officer's impugned action as follows: 6. I have conside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... received in Hundies were meant for a specific purpose with a specific direction. The contention of the appellant that similar practice was done in the past and the same was accepted cannot be a ground for allowing this claim in this year. The each year is different. The assessment proceedings in each year are independent. Therefore, the contention of appellant is rejected. The ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble Tribunal reported in 133 TTJ 57, cited by AR of the appellant is not applicable to the facts of the case. In the case cited by the AR of the appellant, it was noted that the concerned assessee maintained separate Hundies for construction of the building and also for general purposes. No such facts existed in the case. The AR o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l of the assessment order dt. 09-02-2016 makes it clear that even the Assessing Officer was also fair enough in not disputing assessee's hundis during the course of scrutiny. 5. Learned CIT-DR at this stage vehemently argued that the provisions of the said Endowments law tend to override the provisions of the Income Tax Act despite the fact the latter law is specific in nature. Mr. Sai further threw light on legislative relations between the Union and the States as per Part-XI of the Constitution of India that the latter statute; enacted under Union list, prevails over the state endowment law hereinabove. 6. After giving our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival contentions, we find no merit in the Revenue's stand. W ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
