TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 83X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers in assessee s own case for A.Yrs. 2010-11, 2012-13, 2014-15 and 2016-17 where the claim of exemption u/s.11 of the Act has been accepted and granted under similar facts and circumstances by the ld. AO u/s.143(3). We find that the ld. CIT(A) has only followed Co-ordinate Bench decision of this Tribunal in the case of Indian Merchant Chambers in [ 2016 (7) TMI 107 - ITAT MUMBAI] for A.Y.2009-10 which is after the amendment brought in Section 2(15) of the Act and that the Revenue s grievance is only that since the decision has been agitated by them before the Hon ble Bombay High Court, they had not accepted the Tribunal decision and that the same had not attained finality. We find that the decision of this Tribunal is binding on us on the same set of facts and circumstances and hence, we deem it fit not to deviate from the said decision. We find that the ld. CIT(A) had rightly granted relief to the assessee in the instance case by following the decision of the Tribunal. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed. - ITA No.6237/Mum/2019 - - - Dated:- 22-6-2021 - Shri Mahavir Singh, VP And Shri M. Balaganesh, AM For the Revenue : Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sal of the aforesaid grounds of the Revenue, it could be seen that the issue in dispute is squarely covered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Indian Merchant Chambers in ITA No.4076/Mum/2013 dated 29/06/2016 for A.Y.2009-10 which has been followed by the ld. CIT(A) while granting relief to the assessee by way of granting exemption u/s.11 of the Act, apart from placing reliance on other various decisions. The relevant observation of the ld. CIT(A) is reproduced hereunder for the sake of convenience. 6.1 The AO in the assessment order has mentioned that the assessee has filed a copy of 12A certificate issued by the competent authority and is duly registered with DIT(E). Mumbai u/s 12A of the Act. The AO further thereto has mentioned the objects of the trust is as under 1. To promote and extend the Commercial and industrial relations between Italy and India and the development of commercial exchanges between their respective industries, Trade and Businesses and to further the economic interests of Italy and India 2 To consider 811 questions connected with such Industries, Trades and Businesses and economic interest as aforesaid. 3. To promot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dum Articles of Association of the Trust, further gave details of the nature of activities and amount spent on such activities. The assessee thereafter referred to the Amendment in proviso to Sec.2(15) of the Act and to the Circular No.11/2006 dated 19.12.2008 of the CBDT and accordingly submitted that such proviso to Sec.2(15) will apply only to the entities whose purpose is of advancement of general public utility. It was accordingly submitted that their activities, aims and objects are not hit by the newly introduced by the proviso to Sec2(15) of the Act. The assessee also referred to the speech of the Finance Minister on the Finance Bill 2008 to emphasize that the genuine charitable institutions will not be affected by such amendment. They also submitted that ordinarily Chambers of Commerce and similar organization rendering similar services to their members would not be affected by the amendment. The assessee also placed reliance on the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of KP.Varghese vs. ITO 131 ITR 597 (SC), in the case of Kerala State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. vs.CIT 259 ITR 51 and R B Falcon (A) Ply. Ltd. vs. CII 301 ITR 309(SC) so contend ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Act. The AO further held that the assessee is a predominantly mutual association and that in the activity carried out by the appellant, the basic principle or essence of charity was missing. The AO accordingly denied the claim of exemption Sec. 11 of the Act made by the appellant. The assessee on the other side has given detailed submission and has placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdicitonal Tribunal in the case of lndo French Chamber of Commerce vs. ADIT(E)11(1) Mumbai in ITA No 386/Mum/2013 for A.Y.2009-10. In the said decision dated 15.04.2016, the Hon ble Tribunal on the set of similar facts as that of the assessee and discussing the issue at length and considering the decision of Hon ble ITAT, Chennai, in the case of Japanese Chamber of Commerce 99 DTR 145 and decision of Hon ble ITAT. Kolkata Tribunal in the case of Indian Chamber of commerce vs ITO 1491 1284/K/2012 dated 02.12.2014 observed that the case of the assessee Indo French of Commerce and Industry falls under the definition of charitable purpose under the last limb of definition of charitable purposes u/s 2(15) of the Act i.e. the advancement of any other object of general public utility. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t found to be justifiable The AO is accordingly directed to allow the claim of exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. Ground No1 of appeal is accordingly allowed. 3.2. Moreover, we also find that the ld. CIT(A) had also relied on the assessment orders in assessee s own case for A.Yrs. 2010-11, 2012-13, 2014-15 and 2016-17 where the claim of exemption u/s.11 of the Act has been accepted and granted under similar facts and circumstances by the ld. AO u/s.143(3) of the Act. This goes to prove that for subsequent years, the ld. AO himself has accepted the contentions of the assessee. At the cost of repetition, we find that the ld. CIT(A) has only followed Co-ordinate Bench decision of this Tribunal in the case of Indian Merchant Chambers in ITA No.4076/Mum/2013 dated 29/06/2016 for A.Y.2009-10 which is after the amendment brought in Section 2(15) of the Act and that the Revenue s grievance is only that since the decision has been agitated by them before the Hon ble Bombay High Court, they had not accepted the Tribunal decision and that the same had not attained finality. We find that the decision of this Tribunal is binding on us on the same set of facts and circumstances and hence, we deem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
