TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 23X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rting from A.Y 2006-07 to A.Y 2012-13 and for the year under consideration, we therefore donot see any basis to deviate from the decision of the Coordinate Bench as undisputedly, for the year under consideration, there is no change in the facts and circumstances of the case as regard retention of revenues by the assessee society as grant in aid by the Government of Punjab and the assessee society thus continue to remain wholly funded by the Government of Punjab and the assessee is thus held eligible for exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act. Appeal of assessee allowed. - ITA NO. 214/Chd/ 2020 - - - Dated:- 21-9-2022 - SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN, VP AND SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM Assessee by : Shri Aman Parti, Advocate Revenue by : Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR ORDER PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), Patiala dt. 26/12/2019 wherein the assessee has taken the various grounds of appeal whereby it has effectively challenged the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in sustaining the disallowance of exemption claimed under section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act. 2. Briefly the facts of the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the assessee society. 2.4 The submissions so filed by the assessee were considered but not found acceptable to the AO. As per the AO, the Government Polytechnic College Lehragaga was transferred to the society, M/s Baba Hira Singh Bhattal Institute of Engineering Technology in 2005 due to financial constraints faced by the Government of Punjab it was proposed that this college will be run by an independent, self sustainable autonomous society and it shall be deemed as a self sustainable Institution and the Government will pay one time grant of Rs. 1.10 Crores to kick start the project. Thus it is clear that the income of this institute which is self financed cannot fall within in the ambit of section 10(23C)(iiiab) as the institute is not being wholly or substantially financed by the Government. 2.5 It was further observed by the AO that the transfer of infrastructure by the Government of Punjab to the assessee does not substitute the requirement of wholly and substantially financing by the Government and the financing of the institute wholly and substantially by the Government is required every year because every assessment year is an independent year. It was further ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee during the year under consideration was neither eligible for deduction u/s 10(23C)(iiiab) nor u/s 10(23C)(vi). The Hon'ble ITAT has given its judgment dated 17.01.2018 based upon the facts for those assessment years but the fact about receipt for the assessment year 2013-14 were never a subject matter of adjudication at the time of passing the order dated 17.01.2018. As per the AO, out of total receipts of Rs. 8,29,90,727/- for the Financial Year 2012-13 relevant to Assessment Year 2013-14, no amount was received from the Government and the AR has not been able to show the amount of Government Finance received by the assessee during the year under consideration. As per the submissions, the AR has claimed that it is 100% Financed by the Govt, of Punjab by way of providing Infrastructure i.e. land and building, machinery and equipment, furniture and fixtures, library books, vehicles and other assets and it functions under the control of State Government. However, it has not been specified as to what extent and what amount was considered as Government Finance out of total receipts of Rs. 8,29,90,727/- which, include fees received from the students. These receipts cannot be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r section 10(23)(c)(iiiab). 5. The matter travelled up to the Tribunal and the coordinate Bench of ITAT Chandigarh vide order dt. 21/10/2016 in ITA No. 1110 to 1116 has set aside all the appeals to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. 6. In the second round of adjudication, Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition based on the letter of the Principal Secretary Govt. of Punjab to the effect that the institute is fully owned and controlled by the Govt. 7. Before us the Ld. DR relied on the order of the Assessing Officer whereas the Ld. AR relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 8. We have heard Ld. Representatives of both the parties and also perused the material placed before us. The contents of the letter issued by the Principal Secretary Govt. of Punjab are as under: It is stated that Government Polytechnic College, Lehragaga was upgraded by the Government of Punjab during the year 2005 and renamed as Baba Hira Singh Bhattai Institute of Engineering Technology Lehragaga District Sangrur. This Institute is established promoted and its management is fully owned and controlled by the Government of Punjab. As the institute is meeting ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Society as yearly grant. The annual budget of the institute is passed everyday by the Department of Technical Education and Industrial Training through its meeting of the Finance Committee. 7. It was submitted that there is no change in the facts and circumstances of the case, the contents of the said letter issued by the Government of Punjab stand as of today as the letter has not been withdrawn and for the year under consideration, the revenue generated by Institute belongs to the Consolidated fund of the Government of Punjab and the same has been permitted to be retained by the institute for achieving the objectives of the Society as yearly grant. It was accordingly submitted that the decision of the Coordinate Bench for earlier assessment years squarely applies for the year under consideration and the same may be followed and relief be provided to the assessee society. 8. Per Contra, the Ld. Sr DR relied on the findings of the lower authorities. 9. We have heard the rival contentions and purused the material available on record. As we have noted above, the whole case of the AO rest on the consistent factual position right from A.Y. 2008-09 to 2013-14 that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erated and the period for which the revenues are allowed to be retained by the institute. Therefore, irrespective of quantum of revenues which the institute generate in respective financial years, the revenues so generated belongs to the Consolidated fund of the Government and which continue to remain permitted to be retained by the institute. The Coordinate Bench has therefore taking into consideration the aforesaid contents of the said letter has decided the matter for all the years starting from A.Y 2006-07 to A.Y 2012-13 and for the year under consideration, we therefore donot see any basis to deviate from the decision of the Coordinate Bench as undisputedly, for the year under consideration, there is no change in the facts and circumstances of the case as regard retention of revenues by the assessee society as grant in aid by the Government of Punjab and the assessee society thus continue to remain wholly funded by the Government of Punjab and the assessee is thus held eligible for exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act. 11. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 21/09/2022. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
