9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 998X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ional act, both the Ld. A.O. and the CIT(A) erred in justifying that: a. That Uttarakhand Purv Sainik Kalyan Nigam Limited was established by Government of Uttarakhand for welfare and economic upliftment of ex-serviceman and having duly satisfied the prescribed conditions of section 10(26BBB) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. b. The main objects of the Uttarakhand Purv Sainik Kalyan Nigam Limited were to provide employment, financial assistance, loans, subsidy/grants, to impart training for entrepreneurship to the ex-serviceman and their dependents and having duly satisfied the conditions prescribed in the section 10(26BBB) of the income Tax Act, 1961. 3. That, as all the conditions prescribed in section 10(26bbb) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were satisfied, the Ld.CIT(A) and Ld. Assessing Officer erred in holding that Assessee is not eligible for exempting the income of Rs. 6, 79, 59, 986/- for the Assessment Year 2013-14 in terms of the said Section. 4. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the order U/s 143(3)/147 dated 25/02/2015 is merely 'change in opinion'. The action of the Ld. Assessing Officer u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was wholly unreasonabl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut excluding the Assam Rifles, Defence Security Corps, General Reserve Engineering Force, Lok Sahayak Sena, Jammu Kashmir Militia and Territorial Army) for a continuous period of not less than six months after attestation and has been released, otherwise than by way of dismissal or discharge on account of misconduct or inefficiency and in the case of a deceased or incapacitated ex-serviceman includes his wife, children, father, mother, minor brother, widowed daughter and widowed sister wholly dependent upon such ex-serviceman immediately before his death or incapacitation." 7. The basic requirement of law is that the corporation should have been "established by Central, State or Provincial Act. The Corporation was not established by any such Act. It was incorporated as any other company under the provision of the Companies Act, 1956. It was incorporated on 01.03.2004 as 'Uttaranchal Purv Sainik Kalyan Udham Limited. Its name was changed to Uttarakhand Purv Sainik Kalyan Nigam Limited' on 31.01.2007. It is a State Government owned company but that is not enough. Since it was not "established by a Central, State or Provincial Act, it stands disqualified at the threshold its ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the assessee are quite distinguishable from the present case. In the case relied upon by the assessee, the issue involved was allowability of exemption u/s 10(26B) whereas in the present case the issue is with regard to allowability of exemption u/s 10(26BBB). Secondly, in the case relied upon by the assessee, it was held by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court that income attributed to the housing schemes executed for promoting the members of the Scheduled Castes only would be entitled to exemption, provided that was severable from the income accruing to the assessee from other main objects. In the present case, the issue is with regard to the exemption of income of a corporation established by a Central, State of Provincial Act for the welfare and the economic upliftment of ex-servicemen being the citizens of India which is specifically provided in section 10(26BBB) and claimed by the assessee in its return of income. Thirdly, the issue involved in the present case is whether the assessee corporation was "established by a Central, State of Provincial Act' and is eligible u/s 10(26BBB) ? which was not the subject matter of the case relied upon by the assessee. Therefore, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TAT Act, 1961 and submitted that the appeal may be decided in view of the prayer made in the said application filed vide letter submitted on 03.01.2025 before the Tribunal. 8. The Ld. Sr. DR relied upon the order of the authorities below. 9. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. As submitted by the ld. AR on the same facts, the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case had denied the claim of exemption u/s 10(26BBB) of the Act. Further, as submitted by the ld. AR against the above order of the Tribunal for AY 2010-11, the assessee filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Uttarakhand High Court vide ITA No.15 of 2019, wherein, following substantial question of law has been admitted by an order dated 19.10.2020. "Shri Pulak Raj Mullick, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Shri Hari Mohan Bhatia, learned counsel for the respondent. Misc. applications (IA Nos. 9207/19 and 9954/19) with counter and rejoinder affidavits are taken on record. Urgency application (IA No.10128 of 2020) stands disposed off. Heard learned counsels. The following substantial questions of law arise for consideration:- "1. Whether the Ld ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
