TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 900X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alone could be subjected to tax instead of rejecting the claim for exemption in respect of entire income of the assessee. It is also the contention of the assessee that the addition made by the AO with regard to notional interest and addition made u/s 40A(3) of the Act are liable to be deleted, once the assessee is held to be eligible for exemption u/s 11 of the Act. However, it is the contention of the ld. DR that various submissions and contentions raised by the Ld A.R require fresh examination. In the rejoinder to the submissions made by Ld D.R, the counsel of the assessee agreed that all the matters may be restored to the file of Ld CIT(A), as they involve examination of legal and factual aspects.Accordingly, we set aside the order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he trust. 4. Without prejudice to Ground No. 1, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not restricting the addition to income to the extent of violation of the provisions of 13(1)(d) and 13(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and as a sequel of not granting pro-rata benefit u/s 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The facts relating to the case are stated in brief. The assessee herein is a charitable trust registered u/s 12AA of the Act. The object of the assessee trust is to save the Govvansh and to provide medical relief to sick Govvansh. The assessee filed its return of income showing excess application of income of Rs.4.11 crores. The AO, however, noticed following points, which were considered by him as violation of the provisions of the Act: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s received as gift from a donor. With regard to the investment made in the agricultural lands in the name of employees and trustees, the ld. AR submitted that there were legal impediments in purchasing the said agricultural land in the name of the assessee. Hence it was purchased in the names of employees and other persons. He submitted that those persons are only name lenders and the beneficial ownership is vested with the assessee, which is proved by the fact that the assessee has shown purchase of agricultural land as its own investment in the Books of accounts/Balance sheet. He further submitted that the purchase of an immovable property is one of the modes prescribed u/s 11(5) of the Act and hence, as such, there was no violation of pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Act as alleged by the AO. It was submitted that there is no violation of Section 11(5) of the Act, as making investment in immovable property is one of the modes prescribed under the Act and further, the investment in agricultural land, though made in the name of his employees and others, yet the assessee is actually the beneficial owner of the land. It was also contended that the income that is falling within the violations of Act alone could be subjected to tax instead of rejecting the claim for exemption in respect of entire income of the assessee. It is also the contention of the assessee that the addition made by the AO with regard to notional interest and addition made u/s 40A(3) of the Act are liable to be deleted, once the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
