News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
From the Courts »
 ADIT (E), Inv. Circle (1), New Delhi. Vs. India Trade Promotion Organisation, Pragati Bhawan, Pragati Maidan, New Delhi – 110 001.
 Smt. Suman Lakhani, W-9, G.K.-II, New Delhi-110048. vs. ACIT, Circle-II, Faridabad.
 M/s. Basics IT Solutions Pvt. Ltd. G-2, Nizamuddin West, New Delhi-110013 Vs. ACIT Circle – 4 (1) New Delhi
 Shri Naresh Kumar, Village-Sultanpur, Sector- 127, Distt. G.B. Nagar, Noida. Uttar Pradesh. Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2(3), Noida.
 Shri Sandeep Gupta, 1476, Sector-14, Faridabad, Haryana. PIN – 121 001. Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1(1), Faridabad, Haryana.
 M/s. ACE Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd., B – 17, Ashadeep Building, 9, Hailey Road, New Delhi – 110 001. Vs. ACIT, Circle 1, New Delhi.
 Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-23, New Delhi-110055 Vs. Druzba Overseas Pvt. Ltd., M-11, Middle Circle, Connaught Circus, New Delhi-110001
  ACIT, Central Circle -08 (Now CC- 17), New Delhi. Vs. Sh. Sumit Khaneja, H. No. 2, 23, Central Drive DLF, Chattarpur Farms, New Delhi.
 ACIT, Central Circle -08 (Now CC- 17), New Delhi. Vs. Sh. Sumit Khaneja, H. No. 2, 23, Central Drive DLF, Chattarpur Farms, New Delhi.
 Krishna Devi H. No. 823, Palam Vihar More, Bijwasan, New Delhi-110061 Vs. ACIT Circle-44(1), New Delhi
  M/s. S. Gurcharan Singh & Sons Vs. Commissioner Trade & Taxes & Ors.

Srishti Resident Welfare Association, T-6/803, Parsvanath Prestige-II, Plot No.2, Sector 93A, Ghaziabad, vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Ghaziabad.
February, 27th 2019
              DELHI BENCH : SMC : NEW DELHI
                          ITA Nos.7528 & 7529/Del/2018
                       Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15

Srishti Resident Welfare Association,         Vs.   ITO, Exemption Ward,
T-6/803, Parsvanath Prestige-II,                    Ghaziabad.
Plot No.2, Sector 93A,
Uttar Pradesh.

      (Appellant)                                    (Respondent)

            Assessee by                 :      Shri S. Krishna, Advocate
            Revenue by                  :      Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr.DR

            Date of Hearing       :            19.02.2019
            Date of Pronouncement :            27.02.2019


      The above two appeals by the assessee are directed against the common order

dated 30th August, 2018 of the CIT(A)-1, Noida, relating to Assessment Year 2012-13

and 2014-15, respectively. For the sake of convenience, both the appeals were heard

together and are being disposed of by this common order.

2.    In both the appeals, the assessee has challenged the order of the CIT(A) in

levying penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act on the income enhanced by him.

3.    Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a Resident Welfare

Association and registered under the Registrar of Societies, Meerut vide certificate

No.1573 dated 25th February, 2009. The assessee is also registered u/s 12AA by
                                                                ITA Nos.7528 & 7529/Del/2018

Commissioner of Income Tax, Ghaziabad vide C.No.57(03)/Regn.12A/CIT-

GZB/2010-11/2545 dated 26.10.2010. It filed its return of income on 3rd October,

2012 declaring nil income in the status of charitable society. The Assessing Officer, in

the order passed u/s 143(3) on 27th February, 2015, determined the total income at

Rs.6,36,590/-. While doing so, he observed on perusal of the Income & Expenditure

Account that the gross receipts includes surplus amount of Rs.6,39,591/- which was

earned from commercial activities. He examined the objects of the society as per its

bye-laws and noted that none of the objectives as narrated in the bye-laws of the

society are charitable in nature. Relying on the amended definition of `charitable

purposes' u/s 2(15) of the IT Act w.e.f. 01.04.1999, he held that the assessee has not

carried out any charitable activity as provided u/s 2(15) of the Act and, therefore,

cannot be given benefit of exemption u/s 11 and 12 as claimed by the assessee in its

return of income. He accordingly, determined the total income at Rs.6,36,590/-.

Similarly, for assessment year 2014-15, he determined the total income of the assessee

at Rs.33,88,780/-.

4.    The assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A) and the ld.CIT(A) instead of giving

any relief to the assessee issued enhancement notice. The ld.CIT(A) was of the

opinion that the assessee has wrongly claimed registration u/s 12AA of the Act and,

therefore, the entire receipt of the assessee society should be treated as income of the

assessee. He further observed that the assessee is not entitled for the benefit of the

doctrine of mutuality. Since, according to him, the entire expenditure of the assessee

society is for the benefit of the members of the association or persons and their
                                                                ITA Nos.7528 & 7529/Del/2018

relatives, therefore, the assessee has violated the provisions of section 13 of the

Income-tax Act. He accordingly enhanced the income of the assessee society.

5.    Subsequently, the ld.CIT(A) initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the

IT Act. Rejecting the various explanations given by the assessee and observing that

the assessee has deliberately and willfully furnished inaccurate particulars of its

income and has deliberately and willfully concealed the particulars of its income with

the intention of evading tax on its full and correct income liable to be taxed, he

directed the Assessing Officer to levy penalty @ 200% of the tax sought to be evaded

by the assessee on the quantum of income which was enhanced by him over and above

the income assessed by the Assessing Officer against the income returned by the

assessee in its return for both the assessment years.

6.    Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the

Tribunal by raising various grounds wherein it has challenged the direction of the

CIT(A) levying penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act.

7.    The ld. counsel for the assessee, at the outset, filed a copy of the order of the

Tribunal in assessee's own case for assessment year 2012-13 and 2014-15 vide ITA

No.3028 & 3029/Del/2018, order dated 06.11.2018. Referring to the order of the

Tribunal, the ld. counsel for the assessee drew the attention of the Bench to para 10 of

the order wherein the Tribunal has set aside the order of the CIT(A) in enhancing the

income of the assessee. So far as the addition made by the Assessing Officer is

concerned, the issue has been set aside to the file of the Assessing Officer. He

                                                                       ITA Nos.7528 & 7529/Del/2018

accordingly submitted that so far as the impugned penalty appeals are concerned, it

has no legs to stand since the Tribunal has already set aside the order of the CIT(A).

8.    The ld. DR, on the other hand, heavily relied on the order of the CIT(A).

9.    I have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides and perused the

orders of the authorities below. I have also considered the order of the Tribunal in

assessee's own case for the impugned assessment years for the quantum proceedings. I

find, after the income of the assessee was enhanced by the CIT(A) for the impugned

assessment years, the assessee had filed appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal

vide ITA Nos.3028 & 3029/Del/2018, order dated 06.11.2018 for assessment years

2012-13 and 2014-15 had set aside the order of the CIT(A) by observing as under:-

     "10. I have given thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below.
     I have also gone through the contents of the affidavit filed by the Secretary of the
     appellant-society. The undisputed fact is that the appellant society was enjoying
     the registration granted to it by the CIT(E), Ghaziabad u/s 12AA of the Act. I fail
     to understand how can the CIT(A) question the authority of the CIT(Exemptions)
     for granting registration u/s 12AA of the Act. It is for the CIT(Exemptions) to
     decide the allowability or otherwise of the registration u/s 12A of the Act. In my
     considered opinion, the CIT(A) should not have made any observation on that
     aspect and should have restricted himself to the issues raised before him. At the
     most, the CIT(A) could have enhanced the addition made by the Assessing
     Officer, which is within his powers. But by no stretch of imagination it can be
     accepted that the first appellate authority is making enhancement while
     commenting on the powers of the CIT(Exemptions).In my humble opinion, the
     first appellate authority has crossed his powers in deciding the appeal and,
     therefore, his findings have to be set aside. I direct accordingly.

     11. Coming to the action of the Assessing Officer, I find that the Assessing
     Officer has doubted the surplus Rs. 6,36,591/-without examining each and every
     item of income. I, therefore, restore this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer.
     The Assessing Officer is directed to examine each and every item of income and
     decide the issues afresh after allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard to
     the assessee. Accordingly, the enhancement is set aside and the order of the
     Assessing Officer is restored back to his file."

                                                                 ITA Nos.7528 & 7529/Del/2018

10.     Admittedly, the order of the Tribunal came after the penalty was levied by the

CIT(A) u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act for both the years. Since the Tribunal has set aside

the order of the CIT(A), therefore, the very basis on which the penalty was levied by

the CIT(A) does not survive. Therefore, the penalty levied by the CIT(A) is directed

to be deleted. I hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are

accordingly allowed.

11.    In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed.

        The decision was pronounced in the open court on 27.02.2019.


                                                              (R.K. PANDA)
                                                          ACCOUNTANT MEMFBER
Dated: 27th February, 2019
Copy forwarded to
1.   Appellant
2.   Respondent
3.   CIT
4.   CIT(A)
5.   DR
                                                     Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2019 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
SEO Company Search Engine Optimization Company US SEO Local SEO Company Website SEO Company Alabama SEO Company Alaska SEO Company Arizona SEO Company Arkansas SEO Company California SEO Company Colorado SEO Company Connecticut SEO Company Delawa

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions