Centre for Child and Woman Development, Bhubaneswar v. ACIT, CPC, Bangalore

ITA 334/CTK/2016 | 2013-2014
Pronouncement Date: 30-11-2017 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 33422114 RSA 2016
Assessee PAN AAATC5317Q
Bench Cuttack
Appeal Number ITA 334/CTK/2016
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 17 day(s)
Appellant Centre for Child and Woman Development, Bhubaneswar
Respondent ACIT, CPC, Bangalore
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 30-11-2017
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Tags No record found
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted SMC
Tribunal Order Date 30-11-2017
Date Of Final Hearing 27-06-2017
Next Hearing Date 27-06-2017
First Hearing Date 27-06-2017
Assessment Year 2013-2014
Appeal Filed On 12-09-2016
Judgment Text
. . IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI N.S.SAINI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 334 / CTK /20 1 6 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 13 - 20 1 4 ) CENTRE FOR CHILD AND WOMAN DEVEL OPMENT HIG - 93 2 ND FLOOR LUMBINI VIHAR CHANDRASEKHARPUR BHUBANESWAR - 751021 VS. ACIT CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CELL BANGALORE ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : A A ATC 5317 Q ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P.C.SETHI AR /REVENUE BY : SHRI D.K.PRADHAN DR / DATE OF HEARING : 30 / 1 1 /201 7 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 30 / 11 /201 7 / O R D E R TH IS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAI NST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) - 3 BHUBANESWAR DATED 16.05.2016 . 2. THE SOLE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO OF RS.13 67 410/ - . 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED RETURN OF INCOME SHOWING NIL INCOME. IN THE RETURN OF INCOME THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN TOTAL RECEIPTS DURING THE YEAR RS.97 38 098/ - AND AMOUNT APPLIED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSE IN INDIA DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR RS.69 09 976/ - . THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED RS.28 28 122/ - AS AMOU NT ACCUMULATED OR SET APART FOR APPLICATION TO CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES AND THAT IT DID NOT EXCEED 15% OF INCOME DERIVED FROM PROPERTY HELD IN TRUST WHOLLY OR IN PART ONLY FOR SUCH PURPOSES U/S.11(1)A OF THE ACT. IN PROCESSING RETURN U/S.143(1) OF THE ACT THIS AMOUNT WAS REDUCED TO RS.14 60 715/ - WHICH RESULTED IN ITA NO. 334 /CTK/201 6 2 ASSESSING THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE OF RS. 13 67 407/ - AT THE MAXIMUM MARGINAL RATE AND RAISING DEMAND OF RS.5 22 663/ - ON THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE FILED RECTIFICATION PETITION U/ S. 154 OF THE ACT ON 03.02.2015 AND THE AO PASSED THE ORDER REDUCING THE DEMAND TO RS. 3 06 064/ - . 4. THE ASSESSEE BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF AO PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) CHALLENGING THE DETERMINATION OF INCOME AT RS. 13 67 410/ - . THE ASSESSEE C ONTENDED THAT OUT OF TOTAL RECEIPTS OF RS. 97 38 098/ - RS.84 96 556/ - WAS THE GRANT RECEIVED DURING THE YEAR AND THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF GRANT OF RS.17 27 337/ - INCLUDED IN THE ABOVE GROSS RECEIPT WAS RECEIPT FOR THE NEXT YEAR. THUS IF THE RECEIPT OF THE YE AR IS TAKEN AT RS .84 96 556/ - WHICH INCLUDED THE OPENING BALANCE OF RS.13 07 622/ - AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR . D URING THE YEAR THE ASSESSEE HAS UTILIZED RS. 69 76 055/ - WHICH CONSTITUTED 86.37% OF THE TOTAL RECEIPTS OF THE YEAR AND HENCE NO ADDITION O F RS.13 67 410/ - IS WARRANTED. THE CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROVE THAT GRANT OF RS.17 27 337/ - IS HAVING LEGAL OBLIGATION TOWARDS SPECIFIC PURPOSE. 5. THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUB MISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE AO AND THE CIT(A) AND SUBMITTED THAT BEFORE DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL THE ASSESSEE THE CIT(A) HAS NOT ALLOWED ANY OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN ITS CASE AND PRAYED THAT MATTER SHOULD BE REMANDED BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) F OR FRESH ADJUDICATION OF THE ISSUE. ITA NO. 334 /CTK/201 6 3 6. LD. DR ON THE OTHER HAND VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE AND SUBMITTED THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS VERY CATEGORICALLY STATED THAT NO EVIDENCE WAS PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THAT GRANT OF RS. 17 27 33 7/ - WHICH IS HAVING LEGAL OBLIGATION TOWARDS SPECIFIC PURPOSE AND HAS NOT FILED ANY EVIDENCE EVEN BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL TO CONTROVERT THIS FINDING OF THE CIT(A). THEREFORE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) SHOULD BE CONFIRMED. 7. IN THE ABOVE BACKGROUND OF THE CASE I FI ND THAT THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ONLY ARGUED THAT THE CIT(A) BEFORE DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT ALLOWED OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN ITS CASE. I FIND THAT IN THE PROCESSING OF THE RETURN OF INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE U/S.143(1) OF THE ACT DEDUCTION WAS RESTRICTED TO RS.14 60 715/ - AS AGAINST RS.28 28 122/ - CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE OUT OF THE TOTAL RECEIPTS DURING THE YEAR BEING 15% OF THE AMOUNT OF THE TOTAL RECEIPTS. THUS THE INCOME WAS ASSESSEE WAS ASSESSED AT RS.13 67 407/ - . AGAINST THIS THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) CONTENDING THAT OUT OF TOTAL RECEIPTS OF RS. 97 38 098/ - RS.17 27 377/ - WAS THE GRANT RECEIVED DURING THE YEAR FOR SPENDING IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR. THEREFORE THE AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN RESTRICTIN G THE DEDUCTION TO RS. 14 60 715/ - IN PLACE OF RS.28 28 122/ - CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE AND MAKING AN ASSESSMENT OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS. 13 67 407/ - . THIS PLEA CAME TO BE DISMISSED BY THE CIT(A) FOR LACK OF EVIDENCE FILED BEFORE HIM. EVEN BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL N O EVIDENCE HAS BEEN PRODUCED IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION SO AS TO CONTROVERT THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT(A). HENCE I FIND NO MERIT IN THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ITA NO. 334 /CTK/201 6 4 8 . IN THE RESULT APPEAL FILED BY THE AS SESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 30 / 11 /201 7 . SD/ - (N. S. SAINI) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CUTTACK ; DATED 30 / 11 /201 7 . . / PKM SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : / BY ORDER ( SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ) / ITAT CUTTACK 1. / THE APPELLANT - 2. / THE RESPONDENT - 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) 4. / CIT 5. / DR ITAT CUTTACK 6. / GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//