JCIT, Saharanpur v. Sahranpur Development Authority, Saharanpur

ITA 566/DEL/2010 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 05-04-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 56620114 RSA 2010
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 566/DEL/2010
Duration Of Justice 2 month(s)
Appellant JCIT, Saharanpur
Respondent Sahranpur Development Authority, Saharanpur
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 05-04-2010
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted G
Tribunal Order Date 05-04-2010
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 05-02-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: G NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CL SETHI JM AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA AM ITA NO. 566/DEL/2010 A.Y. 2006-07 JCIT SAHARANPUR RANGE VS. SAHARANPUR DEVELOPMENT SAHARANPUR AUTHORITY HAKIKAT NAGAR SAHARANPUR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDE NT) APPELLANT BY : SH.PK PRUSTY SR.D.R. RESPONDENT BY : SH. SANJAY KUMAR C.A. O R D E R PER SHAMIM YAHYA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LDCIT(A) DATED 3.11.2009 AND PERTAINS TO A.Y. 2006-07. 2. THE ISSUE RAISED IS THAT THE LDCIT(A) ERRED IN D ELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 22 66 693/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST EARN ED ON INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT FUND. 3. IN THIS CASE THE ASSESSEE IS A LOCAL AUTHORITY E NGAGED IN THE WORK OF DEVELOPMENT OF TOWN AREA THROUGH FEE AND CHARGES RE CEIVED FROM PUBLIC AND BY MEANS OF TRANSFERRED FUNDS BY THE GOVERNME NT THROUGH DIFFERENT SOURCES. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT THE AO NO TED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT CREDITED INTEREST EARNED FROM IN FRASTRUCTURE 2 DEVELOPMENT FUND AT RS. 22 66 693/- IN THE PROFIT A ND LOSS ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT THE SUMS CREDITED IN THE IN FRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT FUND ARE CREDITED BY ISSUANCE OF THE O RDERS OF THE UTTAR PRADESH GOVERNMENT AND THE ASSESEE HAS NO POWER TO MAKE WITHDRAWALS FROM SUCH FUND. THE POWERS OF WITHDRAWALS RESTS WI TH A COMMITTEE INSTITUTED BY THE GOVERNMENT AND IS HEADED BY THE C HAIRMAN COMMISSIONER OF SAHARANPUR REGION SAHARANPUR. ALL THE PROJECTS ARE APPROVED BY SUCH COMMITTEE AND ON APPROVAL/DIRECTI ONS ISSUED BY SUCH COMMITTEE PAYMENTS ARE MADE. IN THE SAME WAY INTE REST EARNED FROM SUCH FUND DOES NOT RELATE TO SAHARANPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND IS THUS NOT A PART OF INCOME OF SAHARANPUR DEVELOPMEN T AUTHORITY. THE AO DID NOT ACCEPT THESE CONTENTIONS AND MADE ADDITI ON OF RS. 22 66 693/-. 4. UPON ASSESSEES APPEAL THE LDCIT(A) NOTED THE A SSESEE SUBMISSIONS THAT ON IDENTICAL ISSUE IN THE A.Y. 200 4-05 THE ITAT IN ORDER NO. ITA 02/DEL/2008 VIDE ORDER DT. 23.12.2008 HAD D ELETED THE ADDITION. THE TRIBUNAL IN THAT CASE HAS REFERRED TO THE DECIS ION OF HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN CASE OF CIT VS. DELHI INDUSTRIAL DEVE LOPMENT FUND AND ALSO ITAT DECISION IN THE CASE OF KARNATAKA URBAN I NFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCE CORPORATION. THE TRIBUNAL ALSO NOTED THAT THE SAID DECISION OF THE ITAT WAS UPHELD BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT ALSO IN THE JUDGEMENT REPORTED IN 284 ITR 582. THEREAFTER THE TRIBUNAL HELD THAT THE CASE LAW RELIED UPON THE ASSESSEE ARE SQU ARELY APPLICABLE ON 3 THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE. THE ASSESSEE HAD RE CEIVED THE FUNDS UNDER THE ORDERS OF THE GOVT. OF UTTAR PRADESH AND IT WAS REQUIRED TO USE SUCH FUNDS AS PER THE DIRECTION OF HIGH POWER COMMITTEE. IT HAS NO CONTROL OVER THE FUNDS. MORE SO AO HAS NOT BROUGHT TO TAX THE PRINCIPLE AMOUNT AS INCOME OF THE ASSESEE. IF HIS LOGIC IS ACCEPTED THEN ALL THE FEES ETC. OVER AND ABOVE THE EXPENDITURE OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN E XAMINED AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE... FINDING THE FACTS OF TH E CASE IDENTICAL THE LDCIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION FOLLOWING THE RATIO F ROM THE ITAT ORDER FOR A.Y. 2004-05. 5. AGAINST THIS ORDER THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEF ORE US. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE COUNSELS AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. I T IS CLEAR THAT AN IDENTICAL ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL I N THE ASSESEES OWN CASE AND THE LDCIT(A) HAS FOLLOWED THE RATIO EMANAT ING FROM IT. IT IS NOT THE CASE OF THE REVENUE THAT HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS REVERSED THE SAID DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATT ER ADHERING TO THE DOCTRINE OF STARE DECISIS WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF L DCIT(A) AND DECIDE THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF REVENUE. 6. IN THE RESULT REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 5TH APRIL 2 010. (CL SETHI) (SHAM IM YAHYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTA NT MEMBER DATED: APRIL 2010 *MANGA 4 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT; 2.RESPONDENT; 3.CIT; 4.CI T(A); 5.DR; 6.GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY. REGISTRAR