ACIT (E), Circle- 2(1), New Delhi v. Servants of the People Society, New Delhi

ITA 4049/DEL/2018 | 2014-2015
Pronouncement Date: 01-11-2019 | Result: Allowed

Our System has flagged this appeal as eligible for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. If you are party to this appeal, get on a Free Consultation Call with our team of Legal Experts who shall guide you as to how you can save huge Interest and Penalty in VSV Scheme.


Apply Now
        
Try VSV Calculator

Appeal Details

RSA Number 404920114 RSA 2018
Assessee PAN AAATS1730M
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 4049/DEL/2018
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 3 day(s)
Appellant ACIT (E), Circle- 2(1), New Delhi
Respondent Servants of the People Society, New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 01-11-2019
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted G
Tribunal Order Date 01-11-2019
Assessment Year 2014-2015
Appeal Filed On 28-05-2018
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: A NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS. 3081 & 3082/DEL/2017 AYRS. : 2010-11 & 2012-13 SERVANTS OF PEOPLE SOCIETY LAJPAT BHAWAN LAJPAT NAGAR-4 NEW DELHI 110 024 (PAN: AAATS1730M) VS. ADDL. CIT(E) RANGE-II CIVIC CENTRE NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NOS. 3648 & 3649/DEL/2017 AYRS. : 2010-11 & 2012-13 ADDL. CIT(E) RANGE-II CIVIC CENTRE NEW DELHI VS. SERVANTS OF PEOPLE SOCIETY LAJPAT BHAWAN LAJPAT NAGAR-4 NEW DELHI 110 024 (PAN: AAATS1730M) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NOS. 3658 & 3659/DEL/2018 AYRS. : 2013-14 & 2014-15 SERVANTS OF PEOPLE SOCIETY LAJPAT BHAWAN LAJPAT NAGAR-4 NEW DELHI 110 024 (PAN: AAATS1730M) VS. ADDL. CIT(E) RANGE-II CIVIC CENTRE NEW DELHI ( APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) ITA NOS. 4207 & 4049/DEL/2018 AYRS. : 2013-14 & 2014-15 ADDL. CIT(E) RANGE-II CIVIC CENTRE NEW DELHI VS. SERVANTS OF PEOPLE SOCIETY LAJPAT BHAWAN LAJPAT NAGAR-4 NEW DELHI 110 024 (PAN: AAATS1730M) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY SHRI ASEEM CHAWLA ADV. & SH. ASHISH DHUNNA CA DEPARTMENT BY MS. EKTA VISHNOI SR . DR. 2 ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU JM: THESE ARE 08 CROSS APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS REVENUE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE RESPECTIVE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LD. CI T(A)-36 NEW DELHI IN RELATION TO ASSESSMENTS YEARS 2010-11 2012-13 TO 2014-15. S INCE THE COMMON AND IDENTICAL ISSUES ARE INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS E XCEPT THE DIFFERENCE IN FIGURES HENCE THE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEIN G DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE BY FIRST DEALING WITH THE FACTS OF ASSESSEES APPEAL NO. 3081/DEL/2017 (AY 2010-11) AN D ALSO DEALING WITH ITA NO. 3082/DEL/2017 AND IN REVENUES APPEAL NOS. 3648 & 3649/DEL/2017 WHEREIN IDENTICAL ISSUES ARE INVOLVED WHICH ARE REL ATING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2010-11 & 2012-13. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED IN ASSESSEES ITA NO. 3081/DE L/2017 (AY 2010-11) READ AS UNDER:- 1. THAT IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS ILLEGAL BAD IN LAW AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION. 2. THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) IS BEING ASSAILED OF BEING PERVERSE AS THE SAME IS PASSED WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT TAKING A HOLISTIC VIE W OF THE MATTER AND THE RATIO'S OF VARIOUS CASE LAWS WHICH H AVE BEEN RELIED BY THE APPELLANT. 3. THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACTS CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE AO WHEREIN HE HAS DENIE D THE EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT TO THE APPELLANT. 4. THAT THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN HOLDING THA T THE ACTIVITIES CONDUCTED BY THE APPELLANT ARE NOT IN AC CORDANCE WITH THE OBJECTS OF THE APPELLANT SOCIETY. 5. THAT THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACTS I N CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE AO WHEREIN THE AO HAS N OT ALLOWED THE ACCUMULATION OF INCOME OF RS. 2 25 84 5 89/- U/S 11(3) OF THE ACT TO THE APPELLANT. 6. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVES TO ADD ALTER OR MOD IFY THE AFORESAID GROUND AND CRAVES LEAVES TO FILE ADDITIO NAL ROUNDS. 7. THE AFORESAID GROUNDS ARE TAKEN WITHOUT PREJUDIC E TO EACH OTHER. 3 2.1 THE GROUNDS RAISED IN ASSESSEES ITA NO. 3082/D EL/2017 (AY 2012-13) READ AS UNDER:- 1. THAT IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT (A) AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDE R IS ILLEGAL BAD IN LAW AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION. 2. THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) IS BEING ASSAILED OF BEING PERVERSE AS THE SAME IS PASSED WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT TAKING A HOLISTIC VIE W OF THE MATTER AND THE RATIO'S OF VARIOUS CASE LAWS WHICH H AVE BEEN RELIED BY THE APPELLANT. 3. THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACTS CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE AO WHEREIN HE HAS DENIE D THE EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT TO THE APPELLANT. 4. THAT THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN HOLDING THA T THE ACTIVITIES CONDUCTED BY THE APPELLANT ARE NOT IN AC CORDANCE WITH THE OBJECTS OF THE APPELLANT SOCIETY. 5. THAT THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACTS I N CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE AO WHEREIN THE AO HAS N OT ALLOWED THE ACCUMULATION OF INCOME OF RS. 47 11 596 /- U/S 11(3) OF THE ACT TO THE APPELLANT. 6. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVES TO ADD ALTER OR MOD IFY THE AFORESAID GROUND AND CRAVES LEAVES TO FILE ADDITIO NAL ROUNDS. 7. THE AFORESAID GROUNDS ARE TAKEN WITHOUT PREJUDIC E TO EACH OTHER. 2.2 THE GROUNDS RAISED IN REVENUES CROSS ITA NO. 3 648/DEL/2017 (AY 2010- 11) READ AS UNDER:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING E XPENDITURE AS PROVISIONS FOR DOUBTFUL DEBTS AND PROVISION FOR ARREAR OF SALARY. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING U TILIZATION OF INCOME U/S. 11(2) EXPENDITURE AS THIS ACCOUNT HAS A LREADY BEEN ALLOWED ON DEEMED BASIS EARLIER YEARS. 4 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE DECISION OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AS INTEREST INCOME AND OTHER INCOME SHOU LD BE CREDITED IN INCOME AND EXPENDITURE A/C AS THE ASSE SSING OFFICER HAS COMPUTED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE BASIS OF INCOME & EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT SUBMITTED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING A DDITION AS GRATUITY EXPENSES CLAIMED IN INCOME AND EXPENDITU RE A/C AS NO DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE FOR ACTUAL PAYMENT OF TH E EXPENSES WAS FURNISHED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEE DINGS. 2.3 THE GROUNDS RAISED IN REVENUES CROSS ITA NO. 3 649/DEL/2017 (AY 2012- 13) READ AS UNDER:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING EXPENDITURE AS PROVISIONS FOR DOUBTFUL DEBTS AND PROVISION FOR ARREAR OF SALARY. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING UTILIZATION OF INCOME U/S. 11(2) EXPENDITURE AS THIS ACCOUNT HAS ALREADY BEEN ALLOWED ON DEEMED BASIS EARLIER YEARS. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE DECISION OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AS INTEREST INCOME AND OTHER INCOME SHOULD BE CREDITED IN INCOME AND EXPENDITURE A/C AS THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS COMPUTED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE BASIS OF INCOME & EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT SUBMITTED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING ADDITION AS GRATUITY EXPENSES CLAIMED IN INCOME AND EXPENDITURE A/C AS NO DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE FOR ACTUAL PAYMENT OF THE 5 EXPENSES WAS FURNISHED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 5. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD TO ALTER OR AMEND ANY GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED ABOVE AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 2.4 THE GROUNDS RAISED IN ASSESSEES ITA NO. 3658/D EL/2018 (AY 2013-14) READ AS UNDER:- 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE HON'BLE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE APPELLANT DO NOT FALL WITHIN THE DEFINITION OF CHARITABLE PURPOSE AS DEFINED UNDER SECTION 2(15) OF THE INCOME- TAX ACT 1961 ('THE ACT'). 1.1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE HON'BLE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DISREGARDING TH E ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE IT AT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 197 3-74 VIOLATING THE SETTLED PRINCIPLES OF JUDICIAL DISCIP LINE AND JUDICIAL DECORUM. 1.2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE HON'BLE CIT(A) HAS ERRED BY IN WRONGLY RELY ING UPON THE RATIO DECIDENDI OF THE APEX COURT IN LOK SHIKSH AN TRUST V. CIT (SC) 101 ITR 23A.BY CONVENIENTLY EXTRACTING THE PHRASE 'PUBLISHING NEWSPAPER AND MAGAZINES IS NOT EDUCATIO N' FROM THE SAID JUDGEMENT. 2. THE ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW THE HON'BLE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE D ENIAL OF EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT ON THE PREMIS E THAT THE ACTIVITY OF PUBLISHING NEWSPAPER BY THE CONSTIT UTES CARRIED ON BY OR ON BEHALF OF THE TRUST BEING COMME RCIAL IN NATURE WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT THESE ACTIVITIES W ERE CONSIDERED AS CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011- 12. 2.1. THAT ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE HON'BLE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN SUSTAINING THAT 'RUNNING OF NEW SPAPER ACTIVITY CONSTITUTES BUSINESS CARRIED ON BY OR BEHA LF OF THE APPELLANT. IN SUCH A CASE SECTION 11 (4A) WILL APPL Y ONLY IF THE ACTIVITIES ARE INCIDENTAL AND NOTHING HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON 6 RECORD TO SHOW HOW THE ACTIVITY OF RUNNING THE NEWS PAPER BUSINESS IS INCIDENTAL TO THE MAIN OBJECTIVES OF TH E TRUST.' 2.2. THAT THE HON'BLE CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN DENYING EXEMPTION IN TERMS OF SECTION 11 OF THE ACT BASIS IRRELEVANT CONSIDERATION THAT THE ACTIVITIES CARRIE D ON BY THE APPELLANT DID NOT AID AND ASSIST IN ACCOMPLISHING T HE MAIN OBJECT TO ENLIST AND TRAIN NATIONAL MISSIONARIES F OR THE SERVICE OF MOTHERLAND. 2.3. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE HON'BLE CLT(A) HAS ERRED IN STATING 'NOTH ING HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD TO SHOW HOW THE ACTIVITY OF RUNNING THE NEWSPAPER BUSINESS IS INCIDENTAL TO THE MAIN OB JECTIVE OF THE TRUST.' 2.4. THAT THE HON'BLE CIT(A) HAS ERRED 00 FACTS AND IN LAW BY INVOKING SECTION 13(8) OF THE ACT AND THEREBY SUST AINING AN ADDITION AMOUNTING TO RS. 7 62 81 269 ON ACCOUNT OF SURPLUS GENERATED FROM PUBLICATION OF NEWSPAPERS. 3. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE HON'BLE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT ADJUDICATING WITH R EGARD TO SURPLUS AMOUNTING TO RS. 2 73 83 417; INTEREST AND OTHER INCOME OF RS. 3 36 37 911 AND AGRICULTURAL EXPENSES OF RS. 20 22 411. 4. THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE S OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE HON'BLE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN AFFIRMING THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN W RONGLY HELD THAT 'RUNNING OF NEWSPAPER IS NOT INCIDENTAL TO THE OBJECTS OF THE APPELLANT AND THAT IT IS IN THE NATU RE OF BUSINESS SINCE THE ASSESSEE ITSELF HAS SUBMITTED AU DIT REPORTS IN FROM 3CB AND 3CD AND RESULTANTLY ON THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI DECISION ON MEHTA CHARITABLE PRAJNAL AYA TRUST.' 5. THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE HON'BLE CIT(A) HAS WITHOUT AN INDEPENDENT REASO NING OF THE NATURE OF THE ACTIVITIES PLACED RELIANCE ON EA RLIER CLT(A) 'S ORDERS FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2010-11 AND 12-13 CONFIRMING THE IMPUGNED ADDITION. 7 6. THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE CIT(A) IS NONSPEAKING CRYPTIC AND LACONIC IN NATURE AND VIOL ATES THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE FAIR PLAY AND EQUITY . 7. ALL OF THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND NOTWITHSTANDING EACH OTHER. THE APPELLANT CRAVES TO ADD OR SUBSTANTIATE ANY OF THE FACTS RELATABLE TO THE INSTANT APPEAL BEFORE/OR AT THE TI ME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 2.5 THE GROUNDS RAISED IN ASSESSEES ITA NO. 3659 /DEL/2017 (AY 2014-15) READ AS UNDER:- 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE HON'BLE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE APPELLANT DO NOT FALL WITHIN THE DEFINITION OF CHARITABLE PURPOSE AS DEFINED UNDER SECTION 2(15) OF THE INCOME- TAX ACT 1961 ('THE ACT'). 1.1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE HON'BLE CLT(A) HAS ERRED IN DISREGARDING TH E ORDER PASSED BY THE HON' BLE ITA T FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 19 73-74 VIOLATING THE SETTLED PRINCIPLES OF JUDICIAL DISCIP LINE AND JUDICIAL DECORUM. 1.2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE HON'BLE CLT(A) HAS ERRED BY IN WRONGLY RELY ING UPON THE RATIO DECIDENDI OF THE APEX COURT IN LOK SHIKSH AN TRUST V. CIT (SC) 101 ITR 234 BY CONVENIENTLY EXTRACTING THE PHRASE 'PUBLISHING NEWSPAPER AND MAGAZINES IS NOT EDUCATIO N' FROM THE SAID JUDGEMENT. 2. THE ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW THE HON'BLE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE D ENIAL OF EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT ON THE PREMIS E THAT THE ACTIVITY OF PUBLISHING NEWSPAPER BY THE CONSTIT UTES CARRIED ON BY OR ON BEHALF OF THE TRUST BEING COMME RCIAL IN NATURE WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT THESE ACTIVITIES W ERE CONSIDERED AS CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011- 12. 2.1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE HON'BLE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN SUSTAINING THAT RUNNING OF 8 NEWSPAPER ACTIVITY CONSTITUTES BUSINESS CARRIED ON BY OR BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT. IN SUCH A CASE SECTION 11 (4A) WILL APPLY ONLY IF THE ACTIVITIES ARE INCIDENTAL AND NOT HING HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD TO SHOW HOW THE ACTIVITY OF RUNNING THE NEWSPAPER BUSINESS IS INCIDENTAL TO THE MAIN OB JECTIVES OF THE TRUST. 2.2 THAT THE HON'BLE CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN DENYING EXEMPTION IN TERMS OF SECTION 11 OF THE ACT BASIS IRRELEVANT CONSIDERATION THAT THE ACTIVITIES CARRIE D ON BY THE APPELLANT DID NOT AID AND ASSIST IN ACCOMPLISHING T HE MAIN OBJECT TO ENLIST AND TRAIN NATIONAL MISSIONARIES F OR THE SERVICE OF MOTHERLAND. 2.3 THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE HON'BLE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN STATING NOTHI NG HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD TO SHOW HOW THE ACTIVITY OF RUNNING THE NEWSPAPER BUSINESS IS INCIDENTAL TO THE MAIN OB JECTIVE OF THE TRUST. 2.4 THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE HON'BLE CLT(A) IN COMPLETE DISREGARD OF TH E FACT THAT THE PRINTING PRESS WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN ACHIEVING TH E OBJECTIVES OF THE TRUST AND KEEPING ALIVE THE MOTTO OF PANDIT GOPAL BANHU DAS HAS ERRONEOUSLY CONCLUDED THAT THE PRINTING PRESS IS A BUSINESS ACTIVITY NOT QUANTIFYI NG AS A CHARITABLE ACTIVITY. 3. THE HON'BLE CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW INVOKING SECTION 13(8) OF THE ACT AND THEREBY SUST AINING AN ADDITION AMOUNTING TO RS 24 586 358 ON ACCOUNT IF S URPLUS EARNED FROM PUBLICATION OF NEWSPAPERS. 4. THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE S OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE HON'BLE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN AFFIRMING THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN W RONGLY HELD THAT. 'RUNNING OF NEWSPAPER IS NOT INCIDENTAL TO THE OBJECTS OF THE APPELLANT AND THAT IT IS IN THE NATU RE OF BUSINESS SINCE THE ASSESSEE ITSELF HAS SUBMITTED AU DIT REPORTS IN FROM 3CB AND 3CD AND RESULTANTLY ON THE HON'BLE HIGH 9 COURT OF DELHI DECISION ON MEHTA CHARITABLE PRAJNAL AYA TRUST.' 5. THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE HON'BLE CLT(A) HAS WITHOUT AN INDEPENDENT REASO NING OF THE NATURE OF THE ACTIVITIES PLACED RELIANCE ON EA RLIER CLT(A)'S ORDERS FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2010-11 AND 12-13 CONFI RMING THE IMPUGNED ADDITION. 6. THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE CIT(A) IS NONSPEAKING CRYPTIC AND LACONIC IN NATURE AND VIOL ATES THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE FAIR PLAY AND EQUITY . 7. THE HON'BLE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE AD DITION OF RS.2 16 04 434 WITH REGARD TO SURPLUS SHOWN FROM ACTIVITIES RENDERED AT DELHI AND OF RS.2 50 79 967 PERTAINING TO INTEREST INCOME REPORTED AT DELHI. 8. THE HON'BLE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.2 830 527 ON ACCOUNT OF FARM EXP ENSES. 9. ALL OF THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND NOTWITHSTANDING EACH OTHER. 2.6 THE GROUNDS RAISED IN REVENUES CROSS ITA NO. 4 207/DEL/2018 (AY 2013- 14) READ AS UNDER:- 1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 2 04 38 830/- AS PROVISION FOR DOUBTFUL DEBT HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE ITSELF ADDED THE SAME IN COMPUTATION OF INCOME WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT THE AO MADE THE COMPUTATION OF TAXABLE INCOME AFRESH STARTING FROM THE SURPLUS SHOWN IN INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT. 2. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 6 51 049/- AS PROVISION FOR ARREAR OF SALARY HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE ITSELF ADDED THE SAME IN COMPUTATION OF INCOME WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT THE AO MADE THE COMPUTATION OF TAXABLE INCOME AFRESH STARTING 10 FROM THE SURPLUS SHOWN IN INCOME AND EXPENDITURE INCOME. IT IS ALSO SEEN THAT THE PROVISION IS IN FACT PROVISION FOR LEAVE ENCASHMENT NOT ALLOWABLE UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT. 3. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1 27 33 613/- ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ITSELF DISALLOWED THE SAME IN COMPUTATION OF INCOME IGNORING THE FACT THAT UNLESS THE SAME IS CLAIMED AS EXPENDITURE THE ASSESSEE WOULD NOT HAVE DISALLOWED IT. 4. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD TO ALTER OR AMEND ANY GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED ABOVE AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 2.7 THE GROUNDS RAISED IN REVENUES CROSS ITA NO. 4 049/DEL/2018 (AY 2014- 15) READ AS UNDER:- 1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING RS. 3 47 18 749/- EVEN THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN THIS AMOUNT OF RS. 3 47 18 749/- TOWARDS INTEREST INCOME FROM TERM DEPOSIT OF ORISSA BRANCH WHICH HAS BEEN CREDITED DIRECTLY IN THE EARMARKED AND RESERVE FUND AND THIS AMOUNT HAS NOT BEEN SHOWN IN THE INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT. 2. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 3 47 18 749/- BY HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREADY DISCLOSED THIS AMOUNT IN COMPUTATION OF INCOME IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE AO WHILE COMPUTING TAXABLE INCOME HAS STARTED AFRESH FROM RECEIPT AS PER INCOME EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT AND HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE ADDITIONS ALREADY MADE IN 11 COMPUTATION THEREFORE THERE IS NO DOUBLE ADDITION IN THIS CASE. 3. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD TO ALTER OR AMEND ANY GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED ABOVE AT THE TIME OF HEARING. ASSESSEES ITA NOS. 3081 & 3082/DEL/2017 (AYRS. 201 0-11 & 2012- 13) & REVENUES ITA NOS. 3648 & 3649/DEL/2017 (AY RS. 2010-11 & 2012-13). 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING NIL INCOME ON 30.09.2010 WHICH WAS SELECT ED FOR SCRUTINY BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) BY ISSUING NOTICE U/S. 143(2 ) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 (IN SHORT ACT) ON 28.09.2011 AND IN RESPONSE TO T HE SAME THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE (AR) OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARED AND FU RNISHED THE DETAILS AS REQUIRED BY THE AO ALONGWITH BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WHIC H WERE EXAMINED BY THE AO. 3.1 THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY IS REGISTERED U/S. 12A OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER DATED 13.09.1973 AND REGISTRATION OF EXEMPTION U/S. 80G V IDE ORDER DATED 25.11.2011. THE MAIN OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY ARE TO ENLIST AND T RAIN NATIONAL MISSIONARIES FOR THE SERVICE OF THE MOTHERLAND WHICH INCLUDES THE DU TY TO WORK FOR THE EDUCATIONAL CULTURAL SOCIAL ECONOMIC AND POLITIC AL ADVANCEMENT OF THE COUNTRY UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF THE SOCIETY. THE SOCIETY IS RUNNING URBAN/ RURAL/ SLUM DEVELOPMENT CENTRES. BALWARIS PRIMARY / SENIOR SCH OOLS HEALTH CENTRES WORKING WOMENS HOSTEL OLD AGE CENTRES AND A CENTRE PRIMAR ILY FOR THE UPLIFTMENT OF BACKWARD CLASSES. ORISSA BRANCH OF THE ASSESSEE SOC IETY IS RUNNING THE SAMAJ DAILY ORIYA PAPER FROM CUTTACK SAMBALPUR VIZAG K OLKATA BALASORE BERHAMPUR. THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY HAS SHOWN ITS ACTI VITY IN TWO PARTS CENTERED AT DELHI AND ORISSA. FOR THE ORISSA PART ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED AUDIT REPORT IN FORM 3CB AND 3CD. THE NATURE OF BUSINESS IS RETURN ED AS PRINTING AND PUBLICATION OF NEWSPAPER AND BOOKS. THE ASSESSEE H AS SHOWN CONSUMPTION OF NEWSPRINT OF 7091 MT. ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED ITS A UDIT REPORT UNDER SECTION 12A(B) OF THE I.T. ACT 1961 FOR CONSOLIDATED ACCOU NT AND STATED IN PARA THAT PROFIT OR LOSS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE PURCHASES AND S ALES MADE BY THE SOCIETY IS ALSO MERGED IN THE SURPLUS ARISING IN THE CONSOLIDA TED ACCOUNTS DEALT WITH BY THIS REPORT AND A SEPARATE INCOME AND EXPENDITURE A CCOUNT IN RESPECT OF SUCH ACTIVITIES IS NOT ATTACHED HERETO AS REQUIRED UNDE R SUB SECTION (4A) OF SECTION 11 OF SECTION OF THE I.T. ACT 1961 IN VIEW OF THE SOC IETY HAVING BEEN NOTIFIED U/S 12 10(23)(C)(IV) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 1990-91 TO 1992-93 VIDE NOTIFICATION DATED 27.01.1995 AND APPLICATION FOR SIMILAR NOTIFI CATION STATED TO HAVE BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL AWAITED FOR SUBSEQUENT YEARS. 3.2 ASSESSEE-SOCIETY IS ENGAGED IN PRINTING AND PU BLICATION OF NEWSPAPER AND A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 25.02.2013 WAS ISSUED FIX ING THE CASE ON 01.03.2013. IN RESPONSE TO THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE C OUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE ATTENDED THE PROCEEDINGS ON 15.03.2013. THE ASSESS EE HAS TAKEN PLEA THAT THE EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS WERE MADE AT NIL. FURTHER THE QUESTION OF NATURE OF ACTIVITIES OF THE SOCIETY BEING COMMERCIAL IN NATUR E WAS RAISED IN AY 1973-74. THE LD. CIT(A) AND TRIBUNAL DECIDED THIS ISSUE IN F AVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. THE DEPARTMENT FILED REFERENCE APPLICATIONS IN ITAT FO R FILING APPEALS TO THE HIGH COURT. LATER ON REFERENCE APPLICATIONS WERE WITHDRA WN. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO TAKEN THE PLEA THAT THE CBDT HAS ALSO TREATED ITS A CTIVITIES AS CHARITABLE. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS LAW APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THE AO WAS OF THE VIEW THAT ASSESS EE IS REQUIRED TO KEEP SEPARATE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND BUSINESS SHOULD BE INCIDENTAL TO ATTAINMENT OF ITS OBJECTIVE TO AVAIL EXEMPTION U/S. 11(4A) OF THE ACT AND IN VIEW OF SECTION 2(15) WHICH HAS BEEN AMENDED W.E.F. 01.04.2009 TO C URB SUCH PRACTICES. IN VIEW OF THE AMENDED SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT FROM T HE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 ANY ACTIVITY IN THE NATURE OF TRADE / COMMERCE/ BUS INESS OR ANY ACTIVITY OF RENDERING ANY SERVICE IN RELATION TO ANY TRADE COM MERCE OR BUSINESS; FOR A CESS OR FEE OR ANY OTHER CONSIDERATION IRRESPECTIVE OF THE NATURE OF USE OR APPLICATION OR RETENTION OF THE INCOME FROM SUCH ACTIVITY WILL NOT BE ENTITLED FOR EXEMPTION U/S. 11 OR SECTION 10(23) OF THE I.T. ACT IF THEY CARRY ON COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES. WHETHER SUCH AN ENTITY IS CARRYING ON AN ACTIVITY I N THE NATURE OF TRADE COMMERCE OR BUSINESS IS A QUESTION OF FACT WHICH WI LL BE DECIDED BASED ON THE NATURE SCOPE EXTENT AND FREQUENCY OF THE ACTIVITY . THE ASSESSEE WHO CLAIM THAT THEIR OBJET IS CHARITABLE PURPOSE WITHIN THE MEAN ING OF SECTION 2(15) WOULD BE WELL ADVISED TO ESCHEW ANY ACTIVITY WHICH IS IN THE NATURE OF TRADE COMMERCE OR BUSINESS OR THE RENDERING OF ANY SERVICE IN RELATIO N TO ANY TRADE COMMERCE OR BUSINESS. 3.3 AFTER GOING THROUGH THE EVIDENCES FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND AS PER PROVISIONS OF LAW THE AO WAS OF THE VIEW THAT ON T HE SEQUENCE OF AMENDMENT IN THE ACT IN SECTION 2(15) W.E.F. 01.04.2009 WHICH IS APPLICABLE FROM ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. THE CHARITABLE TRUST WITH GENERAL OB JECT OF PUBLIC UTILITY ARE REQUIRED TO ESCHEW ANY ACTIVITY WHICH IS IN THE NAT URE OF TRADE COMMERCE OR 13 BUSINESS OR THE RENDERING OF ANY SERVICE IN RELATIO N TO ANY TRADE COMMERCE OR BUSINESS TO REMAIN CHARITABLE TO CONTINUE REGISTRAT ION U/S. 12A OF THE ACT. THE EFFECT OF THE AMENDMENT IS THAT TRUSTS HAVING OBJEC TS OF THE ADVANCEMENT OF ANY OTHER OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY END USE OF B USINESS PROFIT FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES IS OF NO RELEVANCE DUE TO AMENDMENT IN SEC TION 2(15) OF THE ACT. 3.4 EVIDENTLY THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE OF R UNNING NEWSPAPER PRINTING HAS CHARACTERISTICS AND THE ASSESSEE IS GENERATING INCOME FROM PUBLISHING ADVERTISEMENTS IN ITS NEWSPAPERS. IN VIEW OF THE VARIOUS JUDGMENTS THE AO HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE FALLS UNDER THE LAST LIMB OF SECTION 2(15) AND HIT BY THIS SECTION. ACCORDINGLY PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(8) O F THE ACT IS APPLICABLE AND SURPLUS GENERATED OF RS. 6 00 34 647/- FROM NEWSPAP ER BUSINESS IS TAXED AT MAXIMUM MARGINAL RATE AND LEVY OF PENALTY U/S. 271( 1) OF THE ACT ALSO ALONGWITH VARIOUS OTHER ADDITIONS MENTIONED IN PARA NO. 13 TO 19 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 15.3.2013 PASSED U/S.143(3) OF THE ACT. AGGRIEVED WITH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 15.3.2013 ASSESSEE FILED THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO VIDE HIS IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 01.3. 2017 HAS PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST WHICH THE ASSESSEE A S WELL AS REVENUE ARE IN CROSS APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4. AT THE TIME OF HEARING LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE FILED HIS SYNOPSIS/WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS IN ALL THE APPEALS FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS BY THE DEPARTMENT AND THE SAME ARE REPRODUCED HEREU NDER:- SYNOPSIS : 2010-11 : 3081/DEL/2017 & 3648/ DEL/2017 (CROSS APPEALS) APPELLANT APPEAL: ITA NO. 3081/ DEL! 2017 GROUND NO.1 AND 2: GENERAL IN NATURE GROUND NO.3 AND 4: ADDITION OF RS. 6 00 34 647 /- O N ACCOUNT OF SURPLUS GENERATED FROM THE ACTIVITY OF PUBLISHING OF NEWSPAPER. THE SAID ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLAN T BY THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED SEPTEMBER 17 2019 (COPY ENCLOSED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE 1- 9) PASSED IN THE APPELLANT OWN'S CASE ITA NO. 4984/ DEL/ 201 5 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR ('AY') 2011-12. 14 GROUND NO.5: ADDITION OF RS. 2 25 84 589/- ON ACCOU NT OF INCOME DEEMED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 11 (3) OF THE ACT. THE APPELLANT SUO-MOTO HAS ALREADY INCREASED ITS ASSESSABLE INCOME BY RS. RS. 2 25 85 589/- FOR THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR ENDED ON MARCH 31 2010. (REFER COMPUTATION OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEA R 2010-11 PLACED AS ANNEXURE 10) FURTHER THE SAID ADDITION MADE BY THE LEARNED AO ('LD. AO') TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION. GROUND 6 AND 7 : GENERAL IN NATURE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL: ITA NO. 3648/ DEL/ 2017 GROUND NO.1: DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 4 50 000/- ON ACCOUNT OF PROVISION FOR BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBTS AND RS. 5 00 000/- ON ACCOUNT OF PROVISION FOR ARREARS OF SALARY. THE APPELLANT SUO-MOTO HAS ALREADY INCREASED ITS ASSESSABLE INCOME BY REDUCING ITS EXPENDITURE BY AN AMOUNT OF RS. 4 50 000/- AND RS. 5 OO OOO/- FOR THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR ENDED ON MARCH 31 2010. (REFER COMPUTATION OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEA R 2010-11 PLACED AS ANNEXURE 10). FURTHER THE SAID DISALLOWANCE(S) MADE BY THE LD. AO TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE DISALLOWANCE. GROUND NO.2: ADDITION OF RS. 64 64 637/- ON ACCOUNT OF ACCUMULATION OF INCOME UNDER SECTION 11(2) OF TH E ACT. THE APPELLANT SUO-MOTO HAS ALREADY INCREASED ITS ASSESSABLE INCOME BY RS. 64 64 637/- FOR THE RELEVA NT PREVIOUS YEAR ENDED ON MARCH 31 2010. (REFER COMPUTATION OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010- 11 PLACED AS ANNEXURE 10) FURTHER THE SAID ADDITION MADE BY THE LD. AO TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION. 15 GROUND NO.3: ADDITION OF RS. 2 18 37 525/- ON ACCOU NT OF INTEREST AND OTHER INCOME CREDITED IN RESERVE FU ND FOR ACTIVITIES CENTERED AT DELHI. THE APPELLANT SUO-MOTO HAS ALREADY INCREASED ITS ASSESSABLE INCOME BY RS. 2 18 37 525/- FOR THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR ENDED ON MARCH 31 2010. (REFER COMPUTATION OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEA R 2010-11 PLACED AS ANNEXURE 10) FURTHER THE SAID ADDITION MADE BY THE LD. AO TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION. GROUND NO.4: GENERAL IN NATURE A DETAILED CHART SUMMARIZING ALL THE GROUNDS OF APP EAL FOR AY 2010-11 IS ALSO ENCLOSED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE 14-16. ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 ITA NO. : 3082/ DEL/2017 & 3649/ DEL/ 2017 APPELLANT APPEAL: ITA NO. 30821 DELL 2017 GROUND NO.1 AND 2: GENERAL IN NATURE GROUND NO.3 AND 4: ADDITION OF RS. 9 66 08 554 /- O N ACCOUNT OF SURPLUS GENERATED FROM THE ACTIVITY OF PUBLISHING OF NEWSPAPER AND RS. 2 63 41 112/- ON ACCOUNT OF SURPLUS GENERATED FROM ACTIVITIES OF THE APPELLANT CENTERED AT DELHI. THE SAID ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLAN T BY THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED SEPTEMBER 17 2019 (COPY ENCLOSED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE 1- 9) PASSED IN THE APPELLANT OWN'S CASE ITA NO. 4984/ DEL! 201 5 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR ('AY') 2011-12. GROUND NO.5: ADDITION OF RS. 47 11 596/- ON ACCOUNT OF INCOME DEEMED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 11(3) OF THE ACT. THE APPELLANT SUO-MOTO HAS ALREADY INCREASED ITS ASSESSABLE INCOME BY RS. 47 11 596/- FOR THE RELEVA NT PREVIOUS YEAR ENDED ON MARCH 31 2012. (REFER COMPUTATION OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012- 13 PLACED AT ANNEXURE 11) 16 FURTHER THE SAID ADDITION MADE BY THE LD. AO TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION. GROUND NO.6 AND 7: GENERAL IN NATURE. DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL: ITA NO. 3649/ DEL/2017 GROUND NO.1: DISALLOWANCE OFRS. 59 32 500/- ON ACCOUNT OF PROVISION FOR BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBTS AND RS. 1 00 00 000/- ON ACCOUNT OF PROVISION FOR ARREA RS OF SALARY. THE APPELLANT SUO-MOTO HAS ALREADY INCREASED ITS ASSESSABLE INCOME BY REDUCING ITS EXPENDITURE BY AN AMOUNT OF RS. 59 32 500/- AND RS. 1 00 00 000/- FOR THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR ENDED ON MARCH 31 2012. (REFER COMPUTATION OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEA R 2012-13 PLACED AT ANNEXURE 11) FURTHER THE SAID DISALLOWANCE(S) MADE BY THE LD. A O TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE DISALLOWANCE. GROUND NO.2: ADDITION OF 1 42 65 366/- ON ACCOUNT O F ACCUMULATION OF INCOME UNDER SECTION 11(2) OF THE A CT. THE APPELLANT SUO-MOTO HAS ALREADY INCREASED ITS ASSESSABLE INCOME BY RS. 1 42 65 366/- FOR THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR ENDED ON MARCH 31 2012. (REFER COMPUTATION OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEA R 2012-13 PLACED AT ANNEXURE 11) FURTHER THE SAID ADDITION MADE BY THE LD. AO TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION. GROUND NO.3: ADDITION OF RS. 1 61 09 159/- ON ACCOU NT OFLNTEREST AND OTHER INCOME CREDITED IN RESERVE FUN D FOR ACTIVITIES CENTERED AT DELHI. THE APPELLANT SUO-MOTO HAS ALREADY INCREASED ITS ASSESSABLE INCOME BY RS. 1 61 09 159/- FOR THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR ENDED ON MARCH 31 2012. (REFER COMPUTATION OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEA R 2012-13 PLACED AT ANNEXURE 11) FURTHER THE SAID ADDITION MADE BY THE LD. AO TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION. 17 GROUND NO.4: DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 18 31 216/- ON ACCOUNT OF GRATUITY EXPENSE. THE DETAILS OF THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY WERE SUBMITT ED BEFORE THE LD. AO DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND THE SAID FACT HAS ALSO BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE HON'BLE CIT(A) AT PARA L1(V) PAGE 6 OF HER ORDER. GROUND NO.5: GENERAL IN NATURE. A DETAILED CHART SUMMARIZING ALL THE GROUNDS OF APP EAL FOR AY 2012-13 IS ALSO ENCLOSED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE 17 -20. ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 ITA NO. : 3658/ DEL/ 2018 & 4207/ DEL/ 2018 (CROSS APPEALS) APPELLANT'S APPEAL: ITA NO. 3658/DEL/2018 GROUND NO.1 2 4 AND 5: ADDITION OF RS. 7 62 81 26 9/- ON ACCOUNT OF SURPLUS GENERATED FROM THE ACTIVITY O F PUBLISHING OF NEWSPAPER. THE SAID ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLAN T BY THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED SEPTEMBER 17 2019 (COPY ENCLOSED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE 1- 9) PASSED IN THE APPELLANT OWN'S CASE ITA NO. 4984/ DEL! 201 5 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR ('AY') 2011-12. GROUND NO.3: ADDITION OF RS. 2 73 83 417/- ON ACCOU NT OF SURPLUS GENERATED FROM ACTIVITIES CENTERED AT DE LHI & RS. 3 36 37 911/- ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST AND OTHER INCOME CREDITED IN RESERVE FUND FOR ACTIVITIES CENT ERED AT DELHI AND DISALLOWANCE OF ARM EXPENSES OF RS. 20 22 411/-. IN REGARD TO THE ADDITION OF RS. 2 73 83 417/- ON ACCOUNT OF SURPLUS GENERATED FROM ACTIVITIES CENTER ED AT DELHI THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT THE SAID ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT BY THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED SEPTEMBER 17 2019 (COPY ENCLOSED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE 1 - 9) PASSED IN THE APPELLANT OWN'S CASE ITA NO. 4984/ DEL/ 2015 F OR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR ('AY') 2011-12. 18 FURTHER AS REGARDS THE ADDITION OF RS. 3 36 37 911 /- ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST AND OTHER INCOME CREDITED IN RESERVE FUND FOR ACTIVITIES CENTERED AT DELHI THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT IT SUO-MOTO HAS ALREADY INCREASED ITS ASSESSABLE INCOME BY RS. 3 36 37 911/ - FOR THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR ENDED ON MARCH 31 2013. (REFER COMPUTATION OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 PLACED AT ANNEXURE 12) ALSO THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT IT HAS DULY CONSID ERED THE FARM EXPENSES OF RS. 20 22 411/- WHILE SUO-MOTO DISALLOWING THE AGRICULTURE INCOME IN ITS COMPUTATI ON OF INCOME. (REFER COMPUTATION OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 PLACED AT ANNEXURE 12) FURTHER THE ADDITION/ DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE LD. AO OF THE ABOVE-MENTIONED AMOUNT(S) OF RS.3 36 37 911/- AND RS. 20 22 411/- TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION/ DISALLOWANCE. GROUND NO.6 AND 7: GENERAL IN NATURE. DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL: ITA NO. 4207/ DEL/2018 GROUND NO.1: DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 2 04 38 830/- ON ACCOUNT OF PROVISION OF BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBTS AND RS. 6 51 049/- ON ACCOUNT OF PROVISION FOR ARREARS OF SALARY. THE APPELLANT SUO-MOTA HAS ALREADY INCREASED ITS ASSESSABLE INCOME BY REDUCING ITS EXPENDITURE BY AN AMOUNT OF RS. 2 04 38 830/- AND RS. 6 51 049/- FOR THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR ENDED ON MARCH 31 2013. (REFER COMPUTATION OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEA R 2013-14 PLACED AT ANNEXURE 12) FURTHER THE SAID DISALLOWANCE(S) MADE BY THE LD. A O TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE DISALLOWANCE. GROUND NO.2: ADDITION OF RS. 1 27 33 613/- ON ACCOU NT OF ACCUMULATION OF INCOME UNDER SECTION 11(2) OF TH E ACT. THE APPELLANT SUO-MOTA HAS ALREADY INCREASED ITS ASSESSABLE INCOME BY RS. 1 27 33 613/- FOR THE 19 RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR ENDED ON MARCH 31 2013. (REFER COMPUTATION OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEA R 2013-14 PLACED AT ANNEXURE 12) FURTHER THE SAID ADDITION MADE BY THE LD. AO TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION. A DETAILED CHART SUMMARIZING ALL THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL FOR AY 2013-1 4 IS ALSO ENCLOSED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE 21 - 23. ASSESSMENT YEAR : : 2014-15 ITA NO. : 3658/ DEL/ 2018 & 4049/ DEL/ 2018 (CROSS APPEALS) APPELLANT'S APPEAL: ITA NO. 3658/ DEL/ 2018 GROUND NO. 1 TO 6: ADDITION OF RS. 2 45 86 358/- ON ACCOUNT OF SURPLUS GENERATED FROM THE ACTIVITY OF PUBLISHING OF NEWSPAPER. THE SAID ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLAN T BY THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED SEPTEMBER 17 2019 (COPY ENCLOSED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE 1 - 9) PASSED IN THE APPELLANT OWN'S CASE ITA NO. 4984/ DEL/ 201 5 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY') 2011-12. GROUND NO.7: ADDITION OF RS. 2 16 04 434/- ON ACCOU NT OF SURPLUS GENERATED FROM ACTIVITIES CENTERED AT DE LHI AND RS. 2 50 79 967/- ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST AND OT HER INCOME CREDITED IN RESERVE FUND FOR ACTIVITIES CENT ERED AT DELHI. IN REGARD TO THE ADDITION OF RS. 2 16 04 434/- ON ACCOUNT OF SURPLUS GENERATED FROM ACTIVITIES CENTERED AT DELHI THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT THE S AID ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT BY THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED SEPTEMBER 17 2019 (COPY ENCLOSED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE 1 - 9) PASSED IN THE APPELLANT OWN'S CASE ITA NO. 4984/ DEL/ 201 5 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR (LAY') 2011-12. FURTHER AS REGARDS THE ADDITION OF RS. 2 50 79 967 /- ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST AND OTHER INCOME CREDITED IN RESERVE FUND FOR ACTIVITIES CENTERED AT DELHI THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT IT SUO-MOTO HAS ALREADY 20 INCREASED ITS ASSESSABLE INCOME BY RS. 1 27 33 613/ - FOR THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR ENDED ON MARCH 31 2014. (REFER COMPUTATION OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 PLACED AT ANNEXURE 13) FURTHER THE SAID ADDITION MADE BY THE LD. AO TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION. GROUND NO.8: DISALLOWANCE OFRS. 28 30 527/- ON ACCOUNT OFF ARM EXPENSES. THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT IT HAS DULY CONSIDERED T HE FARM EXPENSES OF RS. 28 30 527/- WHILE SUO-MOTO DISALLOWING THE AGRICULTURE INCOME IN ITS COMPUTATI ON OF INCOME. (REFER COMPUTATION OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 PLACED AT ANNEXURE 13) FURTHER THE SAID DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE LD. AO TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE DISALLOWANCE. GROUND NO.9: GENERAL IN NATURE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL: ITA NO. 4049/ DEL/ 2018 GROUND NO.1 AND 2: ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST AND OTHER INCOME AMOUNTING TO RS. 3 47 18 749/- CREDITED IN RESERVE FUND. THE APPELLANT SUO-MOTO HAS ALREADY INCREASED ITS ASSESSABLE INCOME BY RS. 3 47 18 749/- FOR THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR ENDED ON MARCH 31 2014. (REFER COMPUTATION OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEA R 2014-15 PLACED AT ANNEXURE 13) FURTHER THE SAID ADDITION MADE BY THE LD. AO TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION. GROUND NO.3: GENERAL IN NATURE A DETAILED CHART SUMMARIZING ALL THE GROUNDS OF APP EAL FOR AY 2013-14 IS ALSO ENCLOSED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE 24 -25. KINDLY TAKE THE ABOVE ON RECORD. PRAYED ACCORDINGLY 4.1 IN ADDITION TO AFORESAID WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT AS REGARDS THE ACTIVITY OF PUBLISHING OF NEWS PAPER HAS BEEN DECLARED AS CHARITABLE VIDE ITAT DELHI A B ENCH VIDE ORDER DATED 21 17.09.2019 PASSED IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE AS SESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 IN ITA NO. 4984/DEL/2015 ACIT(E) VS. SERVANTS OF PEO PLE SOCIETY A COPY THEREOF IS FILED BY HIM BEFORE THE BENCH. HENCE HE REQUES TED TO RESPECTFULLY FOLLOW THE SAME PRECEDENT IN ALL THESE APPEALS AND SIMILAR ADD ITION MAY BE DELETED. AS REGARDS OTHER ADDITIONS MENTIONED IN THE WRITTEN SU BMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE HE STATED THAT ASSESSEE HAS SUO-MOTO HAS ALREADY IN CREASED ITS ASSESSABLE INCOME AND INSPITE OF THAT THE AO HAS MADE THE ADDI TION WHICH TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION. HENCE HE REQUESTED THAT THIS ISS UE INVOLVED IN THE APPEALS MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE AO WITH THE DIRECTIONS TO V ERIFY THE SAME WHETHER THE SAME AMOUNTS TO DOUBLE ADDITION OR NOT. 5. ON THE CONTRARY LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE AO AND STATED THAT AO HAS PASSED A WELL REASONED ORDER ON THE BASIS OF AMENDMENT IN SECTION 2(15) OF THE I.T. ACT 1961 WHICH IS EFFECTIVE FR OM 01.04.2009 AND IS APPLICABLE FROM ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. ON THE ISSUE OF EXEM PTION U/S. 11 APART FROM RELYING ON THE DECISION OF THE AO AND LD. CIT(A) SHE PLACED RELIANCE ON THE FOLLOWING CASES. BUT SHE COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE C ONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ISSUE OF ACTIVITY OF PUBL ISHING OF NEWS PAPER IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE ITAT DELHI A BENC H VIDE ORDER DATED 17.09.2019 PASSED IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YE AR 2011-12 IN ITA NO. 4984/DEL/2015 ACIT(E) VS. SERVANTS OF PEOPLE SOCI ETY WHEREIN THE SAID ACTIVITY HAS BEEN DECLARED AS CHARITABLE. AS REGAR DS ISSUES OF DOUBLE ADDITION ARE CONCERNED SHE HAS NO OBJECTION IF THE SAID ISS UES BE SET ASIDE TO THE AO FOR VERIFICATION WHETHER THE SAID AMOUNT TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION OR NOT AS REQUESTED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AS A FORESAID. - INFORMATION SYSTEMS AUDIT & CONTROL ASSOCIATION VS. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS)-1 CHENNAI PASSED IN ITA NO. 1693 (MDS.) OF 2015 (2016) 67 TAXMANN.COM 140 (CHENNAI- TRIB). - MURASOLI TRUST VS. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS IV) CHENNAI (2016) 65 TAXMANN.COM 186 (CHENNAI-TRIB.) - INDIAN TOOLS TECHNOLOGY CENTRE VS. CIT-I JALANDHAR (2014) 42 TAXMANN.COM 359 (AMRITSAR TRIB.) 22 - NEW ELIM CHARITABLE & EDUCATIONAL TRUST. VS. CIT-1 COCHIN-1 (2013) 40 TAXMANN.COM 373 (COCHIN-TRIB.) - WIN PUBLICATION TRUST VS. CIT KOCHI (2014) 41 TAXMANN.COM 119 (COCHIN TRIB.) - EMPLOYERS FEDERATION OF SOUTHERN INDIA VS. ADIT(E)-III CHENNAI (2017) 88 TAXMAN.COM 751 (CHENNAI-TRIB.) - CIT VS. SREE ANJANEYA MEDICAL (2016) 74 TAXAMANN.COM 243 (SC). - ACIT VS. GRAMA VIDIYAL TRUST (2016) 71 TAXAMANN.COM 88 (CHENNAI TRIB.) - DCIT (EXEMPTIONS)-II CHENNAI VS. CHENNAI KAMMAVAR TRUST (2017) 81 TAXMANN.COM 365 (CHENNAI-TRIB.) - ITO (E) CHENNAI VS. FRP INSTITUTE (2017) 88 TAXAMANN.COM 835 (CHENNAI-TRIB.). 6. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND CAREFULLY PE RUSED AND CONSIDERED THE RELEVANT RECORDS THE IMPUGNED ORDERS PAPER BOOKS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED FROM BOTH THE SIDES AND T HE CASE LAWS RELIED THEREIN. ASSESSEES APPEAL NO. 3081/ DEL/2017 (AY 2010-11) 6.1 WE FIND THAT GROUND NO.1 AND 2 IN ASSESSEES AP PEAL ARE GENERAL IN NATURE HENCE NEED NOT BE ADJUDICATED. 6.2 AS REGARDS GROUND NO.3 AND 4 WHICH IS RELATING TO ADDITION OF RS. 6 00 34 647 /- ON ACCOUNT OF SURPLUS GENERATED FROM THE ACTIVITY OF PUBLISHING OF NEWSPAPER. WE FIND THAT THE SAID ISSUE IS SQUAREL Y COVERED BY THE ORDER OF THIS BENCH DATED 17.9.2019 PASSED IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 IN ITA NO. 4984/DEL/2015 ACIT(E) VS. SERV ANTS OF PEOPLE SOCIETY WHEREIN THE TRIBUNAL HAS HELD AS UNDER:- 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORDS ESPECIALLY THE IMPUGNED ORDER PAPER BOOK F ILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE CASE LAWS RELIED THEREIN AS WE LL AS THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE ACT ON THE ISSUE IN DIS PUTE. WE FIND CONSIDERABLE COGENCY IN THE CONTENTION OF T HE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSE IS A CHAR ITABLE INSTITUTION AND MERE RECEIPT OF FEES AND INCOME ETC . CANNOT 23 BE SAID THAT THE ASSESSEE IS INVOLVED IN ANY TRADE COMMERCE OR BUSINESS. THE ASSESSEE IS CARRYING THE MANDATE O F THE WILL OF LATE SHRI GOPA BANDHU DASS IN RUNNING THE PRINTI NG PRESS AND THE NEWSPAPER AND THE INCOME SO GENERATED IS US ED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES AND APPARENTLY THERE IS NO PROF IT MOTIVE IN THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE AND AS SUCH IT CA NNOT BE SAID THAT THE ASSESSEE IS INVOLVED IN ANY TRADE COMMERC E OR BUSINESS AND AS SUCH THE MISCHIEF OF THE PROVISO OF SECTION 2(15) IS NOT APPARENTLY ATTRACTED. WE FURTHER NOTE THAT THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF INDIA TRAD E PROMOTION ORGANIZATION VS. DGIT9E) 53 TAXMANN.COM 4 04 (DELHI) 2015 ORDER DATED 22.1.2015 HAS UPHELD THE CONSTITUTION VALIDITY OF THE PROVISO OF SECTION 2(1 5) WHICH WAS UNDER CHALLENGE BEING DISCRIMINATORY IN VIEW OF TH E ARTICLE 14 (EQUALITY BEFORE LAW) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF IND IA BUT THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS READ DOWN THE STRICT AND LI TERAL INTERPRETATION OF THE PROVISO OF SETION 2(15) AND H AS HELD THAT MERE RECEIPT OF FEE OR CHARGE CANNOT BE SAID THAT T HE ASSESSEE IS INVOLVED IN ANY TRADE COMMERCE OR BUSI NESS AND HAS ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED THE RELIEF TO THE AFORESAID CASE. AFTER CONSIDERING ALL THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A CHARITABLE AND NON-PROFIT INSTITUTION AND ALSO F OUND THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT INVOLVED IN ANY TRADE COMMERCE OR BUSINESS ACTIVITY WHICH ATTRACTS THE MISCHIEF OF THE PROVISO OF SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT AND THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ENJOYING THE EXEMPTION U/S. 11(1) AND ALSO U/S. 10(23C)(IV) IN THE PAST AND ACCORDINGLY FOLLOWING THE PRINCIPLE OF CONSIST ENCY THE AO WAS RIGHTLY DIRECTED TO ALLOW THE EXEMPTION TO THE ASSESSEE U/S. 11(1) OF THE ACT WITH ALL THE CONSEQUENTIAL BE NEFITS BY THE LD. CIT(A). HENCE WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) THEREFORE WE UPHOLD THE S AME AND REJECT THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE AND ACCORD INGLY DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE. 6.2.1 RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE PRECEDENT AS AF ORESAID THE ADDITIONS IN DISPUTE ARE HEREBY DELETED AND ACCORDINGLY THE GRO UND NO. 3 & 4 ARE ALLOWED. 24 6.3 AS REGARDS GROUND NO.5 WHICH IS RELATING TO ADD ITION OF RS. 2 25 84 589/- ON ACCOUNT OF INCOME DEEMED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 11 (3) OF THE ACT IS CONCERNED AFTER PERUSING THE COMPUTATION OF INC OME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 PLACED IN PAPER BOOK WE FIND CONSIDERABLE COGENCY IN THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESS EE SUO-MOTO HAS ALREADY INCREASED ITS ASSESSABLE INCOME BY RS. 2 25 85 589 /- FOR THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR ENDED ON MARCH 31 2010 AND FURTHER THE SAID A DDITION MADE BY THE AO TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION WHICH IN OUR OPINION NEEDS TO BE VERIFIED AT THE LEVEL OF THE AO WHETHER THE SAME TANTAMOUNT TO DOUB LE ADDITION OR NOT AND THEN DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH AFTER GIVING ADEQUATE OPPOR TUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WE HOLD AND DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. IN THE R ESULT THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ASSESSEES APPEAL NO. 3082/ DEL/2017 (AY 2012-13) 6.4 FOLLOWING THE CONSISTENT VIEW AS TAKEN IN ITA N O. 3081/DEL/2017 (AY 2010-11) AS AFORESAID THE ITA NO. 3082/DEL/2017 (AY 2012-13) IS ALSO PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES BEING THE ISSUES INVOLVED THEREIN ARE EXACTLY SIMILAR AND COMMON TO THE ISSUES RAISED IN ITA NO. 3081/DEL/2017 (AY 2010- 11). 6.5 IN THE RESULT BOTH THE ASSESSEES APPEALS ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. REVENUES CROSS APPEAL : ITA NO. 3648/DEL/2017 (AY 2010-11) 7. WE FIND THAT GROUND NO. 1 IS RELATING TO DISALLO WANCE OF RS. 4 50 000/- ON ACCOUNT OF PROVISION FOR BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBTS AND RS. 5 00 000/- ON ACCOUNT OF PROVISION FOR ARREARS OF SALARY. AFTER PERUSIN G THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME FOR THE AY 2010-11) WE NOTE THAT ASSESSEE SUO-MOTO HA S ALREADY INCREASED ITS ASSESSABLE INCOME BY REDUCING ITS EXPENDITURE BY AN AMOUNT OF RS. 4 50 000/- AND RS. 5 00 000/- FOR THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR E NDED ON MARCH 31 2010. FURTHER THE SAID DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO TANT AMOUNT TO DOUBLE DISALLOWANCE WHICH IN OUR OPINION NEEDS TO BE VER IFIED AT THE LEVEL OF THE AO WHETHER THE SAME TANTAMOUNTS TO DOUBLE ADDITION OR NOT AND THEN DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH AFTER GIVING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF B EING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WE HOLD AND DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. 7.1 AS REGARDS GROUND NO.2 RELATING TO ADDITION OF RS. 64 64 637/- ON ACCOUNT OF ACCUMULATION OF INCOME UNDER SECTION 11( 2) OF THE ACT. IT IS NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE SUO-MOTO HAS ALREADY INCREASED IT S ASSESSABLE INCOME BY RS. 64 64 637/- FOR THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR ENDED ON MARCH 31 2010. FURTHER 25 THE SAID ADDITION MADE BY THE AO TANTAMOUNT TO DOUB LE ADDITION WHICH IN OUR OPINION NEEDS TO BE VERIFIED AT THE LEVEL OF THE A O WHETHER THE SAME TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION OR NOT AND THEN DEC IDE THE SAME AFRESH AFTER GIVING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE A SSESSEE. WE HOLD AND DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. 7.2 AS REGARDS GROUND NO.3: ADDITION OF RS. 2 18 37 525/- ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST AND OTHER INCOME CREDITED IN RESERVE FUND FOR ACTIVITIES CENTERED AT DELHI. IT IS NOTED THAT ASSESSEE SUO-MOTO HAS ALREA DY INCREASED ITS ASSESSABLE INCOME BY RS. 2 18 37 525/- FOR THE RELEVANT PREVIO US YEAR ENDED ON MARCH 31 2010. FURTHER THE SAID ADDITION MADE BY THE AO TA NTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION WHICH IN OUR OPINION NEEDS TO BE VERIFIED AT THE L EVEL OF THE AO WHETHER THE SAME TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION OR NOT AND THEN DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH AFTER GIVING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WE HOLD AND DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. IN THE RESULT THE REVENUES APPEAL STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. REVENUES CROSS APPEAL : ITA NO. 3649/DEL/2017 (AY 2012-13) 7.3 FOLLOWING THE CONSISTENT VIEW AS TAKEN IN ITA N O. 3648/DEL/2017 (AY 2010-11) AS AFORESAID THE GROUND NO. 1 2 & 3 RA ISED IN ITA NO. 3649/DEL/2017 (AY 2012-13) ARE ALSO SET ASIDE TO TH E AO WITH THE SIMILAR DIRECTIONS AS AFORESAID BEING THE GROUND NO. 1 2 & 3 ARE EXACTLY SIMILAR AND COMMON TO THE GROUND NO. 1 2 & 3 RAISED IN ITA N O. 3648/DEL/2017 (AY 2010- 11). 7.4 AS REGARDS GROUND NO. 4 RELATING TO DISALLOWAN CE OF RS. 18 31 216/- ON ACCOUNT OF GRATUITY EXPENSE IS CONCERNED WE FIND T HAT THE DETAILS OF PAYMENT OF GRATUITY WERE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO DURING THE A SSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND THE SAID FACT HAS ALSO BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE LD. CIT (A) AT PARA 11(V) PAGE 6 OF HER ORDER WHICH DOES NOT NEED ANY INTERFERENCE ON OUR PART HENCE WE UPHOLD THE SAME AND REJECT THE GROUND NO. 4 OF THE REVENUE . IN THE RESULT THE REVENUES APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ASSESSEES ITA NO. : 3658/DEL/ 2018 (AY 2013-14) 8. AS REGARDS GROUND NO.1 2 4 AND 5 RELATING TO A DDITION OF RS. 7 62 81 269/- ON ACCOUNT OF SURPLUS GENERATED FROM THE ACTIVITY OF PUBLISHING OF NEWSPAPER ARE CONCERNED WE FIND THAT THE SAID ISSU ES ARE SQUARELY COVERED BY THE ORDER OF THIS BENCH DATED 17.9.2019 PASSED IN A SSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 IN ITA NO. 4984/DEL/2015 ACIT(E) VS. SERVANTS OF PEOPLE SOCIETY HAS HELD AS UNDER:- 26 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORDS ESPECIALLY THE IMPUGNED ORDER PAPER BOOK F ILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE CASE LAWS RELIED THEREIN AS WE LL AS THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE ACT ON THE ISSUE IN DIS PUTE. WE FIND CONSIDERABLE COGENCY IN THE CONTENTION OF T HE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSE IS A CHAR ITABLE INSTITUTION AND MERE RECEIPT OF FEES AND INCOME ETC . CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE ASSESSEE IS INVOLVED IN ANY TRADE COMMERCE OR BUSINESS. THE ASSESSEE IS CARRYING THE MANDATE O F THE WILL OF LATE SHRI GOPA BANDHU DASS IN RUNNING THE PRINTI NG PRESS AND THE NEWSPAPER AND THE INCOME SO GENERATED IS US ED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES AND APPARENTLY THERE IS NO PROF IT MOTIVE IN THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE AND AS SUCH IT CA NNOT BE SAID THAT THE ASSESSEE IS INVOLVED IN ANY TRADE COMMERC E OR BUSINESS AND AS SUCH THE MISCHIEF OF THE PROVISO OF SECTION 2(15) IS NOT APPARENTLY ATTRACTED. WE FURTHER NOTE THAT THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF INDIA TRAD E PROMOTION ORGANIZATION VS. DGIT9E) 53 TAXMANN.COM 4 04 (DELHI) 2015 ORDER DATED 22.1.2015 HAS UPHELD THE CONSTITUTION VALIDITY OF THE PROVISO OF SECTION 2(1 5) WHICH WAS UNDER CHALLENGE BEING DISCRIMINATORY IN VIEW OF TH E ARTICLE 14 (EQUALITY BEFORE LAW) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF IND IA BUT THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS READ DOWN THE STRICT AND LI TERAL INTERPRETATION OF THE PROVISO OF SETION 2(15) AND H AS HELD THAT MERE RECEIPT OF FEE OR CHARGE CANNOT BE SAID THAT T HE ASSESSEE IS INVOLVED IN ANY TRADE COMMERCE OR BUSI NESS AND HAS ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED THE RELIEF TO THE AFORESAID CASE. AFTER CONSIDERING ALL THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A CHARITABLE AND NON-PROFIT INSTITUTION AND ALSO F OUND THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT INVOLVED IN ANY TRADE COMMERCE OR BUSINESS ACTIVITY WHICH ATTRACTS THE MISCHIEF OF THE PROVISO OF SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT AND THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ENJOYING THE EXEMPTION U/S. 11(1) AND ALSO U/S. 10(23C)(IV) IN THE PAST AND ACCORDINGLY FOLLOWING THE PRINCIPLE OF CONSIST ENCY THE AO WAS RIGHTLY DIRECTED TO ALLOW THE EXEMPTION TO THE ASSESSEE 27 U/S. 11(1) OF THE ACT WITH ALL THE CONSEQUENTIAL BE NEFITS BY THE LD. CIT(A). HENCE WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) THEREFORE WE UPHOLD THE S AME AND REJECT THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE AND ACCORD INGLY DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE. 8.1 RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE PRECEDENT AS AFOR ESAID THE ADDITIONS IN DISPUTE ARE HEREBY DELETED AND ACCORDINGLY THE GROUND NO. 1 2 4 & 5 ARE ALLOWED. 8.2 AS REGARDS GROUND NO.3 RELATING TO ADDITION OF RS. 2 73 83 417/- ON ACCOUNT OF SURPLUS GENERATED FROM ACTIVITIES CENTER ED AT DELHI & RS. 3 36 37 911/- ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST AND OTHER INCO ME CREDITED IN RESERVE FUND FOR ACTIVITIES CENTERED AT DELHI AND DISALLOWANCE O F FARM EXPENSES OF RS. 20 22 411/- ARE CONCERNED WE FIND THAT ADDITION OF RS. 2 73 83 417/- ON ACCOUNT OF SURPLUS GENERATED FROM ACTIVITIES CENTER ED AT DELHI THE THIS ISSUE IS SQUARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE D ECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED SEPTEMBER 17 2019 PASSED IN THE APPELLANT OWN'S C ASE ITA NO. 4984/ DEL/ 2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR ('AY') 2011-12 AS AFO RESAID. HENCE RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE PRECEDENT AS AFORESAID THIS ADDITIO N IS DELETED. 8.2.1 FURTHER AS REGARDS THE ADDITION OF RS. 3 36 37 911/- ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST AND OTHER INCOME CREDITED IN RESERVE FUND FOR ACTIVITIES CENTERED AT DELHI THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT IT SUO-MOTO HAS A LREADY INCREASED ITS ASSESSABLE INCOME BY RS. 3 36 37 911/- FOR THE RELE VANT PREVIOUS YEAR ENDED ON MARCH 31 2013. IT IS ALSO NOTED THAT THAT ASSESSEE HAS DULY CONSIDERED THE FARM EXPENSES OF RS. 20 22 411/- WHILE SUO-MOTO DISALLOW ING THE AGRICULTURE INCOME IN ITS COMPUTATION OF INCOME. FURTHER THE ADDITION / DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO OF THE ABOVE-MENTIONED AMOUNT(S) OF RS.3 36 37 9 11/- AND RS. 20 22 411/- TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION/ DISALLOWANCE WHICH IN OUR OPINION NEEDS TO BE VERIFIED AT THE LEVEL OF THE AO WHETHER THE SAME TA NTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION OR NOT AND THEN DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH AFTER GIVIN G ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WE HOLD AND DIRECT ACC ORDINGLY. IN THE RESULT THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ASSESSEES APPEAL NO. 3659/ DEL/2018 (AY 2014-15) 8.3 FOLLOWING THE CONSISTENT VIEW AS TAKEN IN ITA N O. 3658/DEL/2018 (AY 2013-14) AS AFORESAID THE ITA NO. 3659/DEL/2018 (AY 2014-15) IS ALSO PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES BEING THE ISSUES INVOLVED THEREIN ARE EXACTLY SIMILAR AND COMMON TO THE ISSUES IN ITA NO. 3658/DE L/2018 (AY 2013-14). 28 8.4 IN THE RESULT ASSESSEES APPEAL PARTLY ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL: ITA NO. 4207/ DEL/2018 (AY 201 3-14) 9. AS REGARDS GROUND NO.1 RELATING TO DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 2 04 38 830/- ON ACCOUNT OF PROVISION OF BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBTS AND RS. 6 51 049/- ON ACCOUNT OF PROVISION FOR ARREARS OF SALARY. THE ASSESSEE SUO-M OTO HAS ALREADY INCREASED ITS ASSESSABLE INCOME BY REDUCING ITS EXPENDITURE BY AN AMOUNT OF RS. 2 04 38 830/- AND RS. 6 51 049/- FOR THE RELEVANT P REVIOUS YEAR ENDED ON MARCH 31 2013. FURTHER THE SAID DISALLOWANCE MADE BY TH E. AO TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE DISALLOWANCE WHICH IN OUR OPINION NEEDS TO BE VER IFIED AT THE LEVEL OF THE AO WHETHER THE SAME TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION OR N OT AND THEN DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH AFTER GIVING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF B EING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WE HOLD AND DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. 9.1 AS REGARDS GROUND 2 RELATING TO ADDITION OF RS. 1 27 33 613/- ON ACCOUNT OF ACCUMULATION OF INCOME UNDER SECTION 11(2) OF TH E ACT. THE ASSESSEE SUO- MOTO HAS ALREADY INCREASED ITS ASSESSABLE INCOME BY RS. 1 27 33 613/- FOR THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR ENDED ON MARCH 31 2013. FUR THER THE SAID ADDITION MADE BY THE LD. AO TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION WHICH IN OUR OPINION NEEDS TO BE VERIFIED AT THE LEVEL OF THE AO WHETHER THE S AME TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION OR NOT AND THEN DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH AF TER GIVING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WE HOLD AND DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. IN THE RESULT THE REVENUES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STA TISTICAL PURPOSES. DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL: ITA NO. 4049/ DEL/ 2018 (AY 20 14-15) 10. AS REGARDS GROUND NO. 1 AND 2 RELATING TO ADDIT ION ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST AND OTHER INCOME AMOUNTING TO RS. 3 47 18 749/- CRE DITED IN RESERVE FUND. WE NOTE THAT THE ASSESSEE SUO-MOTO HAS ALREADY INCREAS ED ITS ASSESSABLE INCOME BY RS. 3 47 18 749/- FOR THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR EN DED ON MARCH 31 2014. FURTHER THE SAID ADDITION MADE BY THE AO TANTAMOU NT TO DOUBLE ADDITION WHICH IN OUR OPINION NEEDS TO BE VERIFIED AT THE LEVEL O F THE AO WHETHER THE SAME TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION OR NOT AND THEN DECID E THE SAME AFRESH AFTER GIVING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE A SSESSEE. WE HOLD AND DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. IN THE RESULT THE REVENUES APPEAL I S ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 10.1 THE JUDICIAL DECISIONS RELIED UPON BY THE LD. SR. DR. HAVE BEEN DULY CONSIDERED. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW WE DO NOT FIND ANY PARITY IN THE FACTS OF THE DECISIONS RELIED UPON WITH THE PECULIAR FACTS OF TH E CASE IN HAND. 29 11. IN THE RESULT THE ASSESSEES APPEAL NOS. 3081 & 3082/DEL/2017 (A.YRS. 2010-11& 2012-13) ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTIC AL PURPOSES AND REVENUES CROSS APPEALS NO. 3648/DEL/2017 (AY 2010-11) IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AND ITA 3649/DEL/2017 (AY 2012-13) IS PART LY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AND ASSESSEES APPEALS NOS. 3658/DEL/2018 (AY 2013-14) & 3659/DEL/2018 (AY 2014-15) ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR S TATISTICAL PURPOSES AND REVENUES CROSS APPEALS NO. 4207/DEL/2018 (AY 2013- 14) AND 4049/DEL/2018 (AY 2014-15) ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THIS DECISION IS PRONOUNCED ON 01.11.2019. SD/- SD/- (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) (H.S. SID HU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL M EM BER DATED: 01.11.2019 SRB COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI