The DCIT, 1(1), Ujjain v. M/s Kund Kund Pravancan Prasar Sansthan, Ujjain

ITA 221/IND/2013 | 2005-2006
Pronouncement Date: 30-10-2013 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 22122714 RSA 2013
Assessee PAN AAATK6588R
Bench Indore
Appeal Number ITA 221/IND/2013
Duration Of Justice 6 month(s) 11 day(s)
Appellant The DCIT, 1(1), Ujjain
Respondent M/s Kund Kund Pravancan Prasar Sansthan, Ujjain
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 30-10-2013
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 30-10-2013
Assessment Year 2005-2006
Appeal Filed On 18-04-2013
Judgment Text
1 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.C. SHARMA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 221/IND/2013 A.Y.2005-06 DCIT 1(1) UJJAIN :: APPELLANT VS M/S KUND KUND PRAVACHAN PRASAR SANSTHAN UJJAIN PAN AAATK 6588R :: RESPONDENT CO NO. 68/IND/2013 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 221/IND/2013) A.Y.2005-06 M/S KUND KUND PRAVACHAN PRASAR SANSTHAN UJJAIN :: OBJECTOR VS DCIT 1(1) UJJAIN :: RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY SHRI PRAKASH JAIN REVENUE BY SHRI BHIM KUNVAR DATE OF HEARING 29.10.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 29.10.2013 2 O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DA TED 14.1.2013 OF THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY UJJAIN. THE CRUX OF ARGUMENTS IS THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) WAS UNJUSTI FIED IN ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED UNDER RULE 46A AND PL ACING RELIANCE ON THE DECISION IN DIT VS. RAMKRISHNA SEWA ASHRAM (201 2) 205 TAXMAN 26 (KAR) WHEN SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY WAS PRO VIDED TO THE ASSESSEE DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 2. DURING HEARING THE LEARNED SENIOR DR DEFENDED TH E ASSESSMENT ORDER WHEREAS THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR TH E ASSESSEE SUPPORTED THE IMPUGNED ORDER. WE HAVE CONSIDERED TH E RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON R ECORD. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED RETURN WITH THE REMARK THAT THE TRUST HAS APPLIED FOR REGISTRATION AS CHAR ITABLE TRUST U/S 12A OF THE ACT. THE TRUST RECEIVED VOLUNTARY CONTRI BUTION OF RS. 24 55 987/- WITH SPECIFIC DIRECTION THAT THE SAME S HALL FORM PART OF THE CORPUS FUND OF THE TRUST. THE ASSESSEE FILED AP PLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A). NOT ICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE TR UST FILED WRIT 3 PETITION U/S 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEFOR E THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH. THE HONBLE HIGH COURT VID E ORDER DATED 28.1.2010 DIRECTED THE LEARNED CIT TO DECIDE THE IS SUE OF GRANT OF REGISTRATION ON THE BASIS OF APPLICATION DATED 23. 3.2001 AFRESH. THE ASSESSEE AGAIN FILED APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATI ON WHICH WAS REJECTED BY THE LEARNED CIT VIDE ORDER DATED 19.2.2 009. AGAINST THIS REJECTION THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE TRI BUNAL WHEREIN THE TRIBUNAL DIRECTED THE LEARNED CIT TO GRANT REGISTRA TION TO THE TRUST VIDE ORDER DATED 10.8.2009. THE CIT GRANTED REGISTR ATION TO THE ASSESSEE WITH EFFECT FROM 2008. 3. BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE CHALLENG ED THE NON- GRANTING OF EXEMPTION U/S 11(1)(D) OF THE ACT IN RE SPECT OF THE DONATIONS RECEIVED AT RS.24 55 987/-. THE WRITTEN S UBMISSIONS FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHICH HAVE BEEN REPRODUCED AT PAGE 7 ONWARDS WERE DULY CONSIDERED. THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHO RITY WAS SATISFIED WITH THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND FINALLY DE LETED THE ADDITION SO MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE RE VENUE IS AGGRIEVED AND IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. 4 3.1 IF THE OBSERVATION MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER CONCLUSION DRAWN IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND THE ASSERTION MADE BY THE LD. RESPECTIVE COUNSEL ARE KEPT IN JUXTAPOSITION ALONG WITH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD WE FIND THAT THERE IS UNCONTRO VERTED FINDING AT PAGE 9 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT BEFORE THE LD. CI T(A) THE ASSESSEE FILED THE CONFIRMATION RECEIVED FROM THE D ONORS CONFIRMING THAT DONATIONS GIVEN BY THEM FOR THE CORPUS FUND WI TH THE SPECIFIC DIRECTIONS. THESE CONFIRMATIONS WERE FILED BEFORE T HE LD. CIT(A) AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. REMAND REPORT WAS CALLED FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER RULE 46A OF THE IT RULES IN WHICH VID E REMAND REPORT DATED 10.12.2012 THE ASSESSING OFFICER DULY CONFIR MED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS GRANTED REGISTRATION W.E.F. 1.4.2000 U /S 12A/12AA OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER CROSS VERIFIED THE DONORS ON RANDOM BASIS WHO CONFIRMED THAT THE DONATION WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TOWARDS CORPUS FUND. THE HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COU RT IN THE CASE OF DIT VS. RAMKRISHNA SEVA ASHRAM (2012) 205 TAXMAN 26 (KAR) AND PARA 13 OF THE ORDER HAS DEALT WITH IN IDENTICA L SITUATION AND HELD AS UNDER: THE WORD CORPUS IS USED IN THE CONTEXT OF THE A CT. ONE HAS TO UNDERSTAND THE SAME IN THE CONTEXT OF A CAPI TAL OPPOSED TO AN EXPENDITURE. IT IS A CAPITAL OF AN AS SESSEE; A 5 CAPITAL OF AN ESTATE; CAPITAL OF A TRUST; A CAPITAL OF AN INSTITUTION. THEREFORE IF ANY VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTI ON IS MADE WITH A SPECIFIC DIRECTION IT SHALL BE TREATED AS T HE CAPITAL OF THE TRUST FOR CARRYING ON ITS CHARITABLE OR RELIGIO US ACTIVITIES THEN SUCH AN INCOME FALLS UNDER SECTION 11(1)(D) A ND IS NOT LIABLE TO TAX. THEREFORE IT IS NOT NECESSARY THAT A VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTION SHOULD BE MADE WITH A SPECIFIC DIRECTI ON TO TREAT IT AS CORPUS. IF THE INTENTION OF THE DONOR IS TO G IVE THAT MONEY TO A TRUST WHICH THEY WILL KEEP IT IN TRUST A CCOUNT IN DEPOSIT AND THE INCOME FROM THE SAME IS UTILIZED FO R CARRYING ON A PARTICULAR ACTIVITY IT SATISFIES THE DEFINITI ON PART OF THE CORPUS. THE ASSESSEE WOULD BE ENTITLED TO THE BENEF IT OF EXEMPTIONS FROM PAYMENT OF TAX LEVIED. IF THE TOTALITY OF FACTS AND MORE SPECIFICALLY CON FIRMATIONS FILED BY THE DONORS WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE CONCLUSION DRAWN BY THE LD. CIT(A). AS SUCH WE FIND THAT NEITHER THERE IS ANY MISTAKE IN ADMITTING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES NOR THE ALLEGATION T HAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY WAS NOT PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE IS SUB STANTIATED THEREFORE THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE HA VING NO MERIT CONSEQUENTLY DISMISSED RESULTING INTO DISMISSAL O F THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. 4. NOW WE SHALL TAKE UP THE CROSS-OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE WHEREIN REOPENING OF THE CASE U/S 147 OF THE ACT W HICH WAS UPHELD BY THE LD. CIT(A) HAS BEEN CHALLENGED. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRESS THE CROSS-OBJECTION AT THE T IME OF HEARING THEREFORE IT IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 6 FINALLY THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AS WELL AS THE C ROSS-OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LD. REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH SIDES AT THE CONCL USION OF THE HEARING ON 29.10.2013. SD/- SD/- (R.C.SHARMA) (JOGINDER SINGH ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL ME MBER DATED: 30.10.2013 COPY TO: APPELLANT RESPONDENT CIT CIT(A) DR GU ARD FILE !VYAS!