Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad
Ddit(Exemptions), Hyd, Hyderabad vs Hyderabad Cricket Association, Hyd, ... on 8 March, 2021
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
HYDERABAD BENCHES "A" : HYDERABAD
(THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE)
BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND
SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent
Joint Director of
511/Hyd/15 2008-09 Income Tax
(Exemptions),
Hyderabad
Hyderabad Cricket Deputy Director of
512/Hyd/15 2010-11 Association, Income Tax
Hyderabad (Exemptions)-II,
[PAN: AAATT6229Q] Hyderabad
Joint Director of
513/Hyd/15 2011-12 Income Tax
(Exemptions),
Hyderabad
533/Hyd/15 2008-09 Asst. Commissioner
of Income Tax
534/Hyd/15 2011-12 (Exemptions) i/c,
Circle, Hyderabad Cricket
Hyderabad Association,
Deputy Hyderabad
Commissioner of [PAN: AAATT6229Q]
780/Hyd/15 2010-11 Income Tax
(Exemptions),
Hyderabad
For Assessee : Shri C.Suresh, AR
For Revenue : Smt. Nivedita Biswas &
Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DRs
Date of Hearing : 03-03-2021
Date of Pronouncement : 08-03-2021
ORDER
PER S.S.GODARA, J.M. :
The assessee and the Revenue have filed their instant six cross-appeals for AYs.2008-09, 2010-11 and 2011-12 against :- 2 -:
Hyderabad Cricket Association (Cross appeals) the CIT(A)-9, Hyderabad's order(s) dated 13-02-2015, 05-03- 2015, passed in case Nos.83, 0001 & 89/CIT(Ex)/CIT(A)-9/14- 15 (assessment year-wise), involving proceedings u/s.143(3) r.ws.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, 'the Act'];
respectively.
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
2. It transpires during the course of hearing that both these parties have raised identical substantive grounds in each of their three cross appeals. We advert to the assessee's cases ITA Nos.511 to 513/Hyd/2015, wherein it has canvassed the following substantive grounds in first of the said appeals:
"1.The order of the learned Commissioner of Income tax(Appeals) [C.I.T(A)], Hyderabad is erroneous in law and on the facts of the case.
2.The learned C.I.T(A) erred in holding that the assessee's claim of having incurred expenditure for charitable purposes cannot be accepted to the extent of Rs.2,17,71,842/-, Rs.79,708/-, Rs.14,36,270/-, Rs12,12,898/- and Rs.96,237/- on the ground that the assessee did not produce evidence for the said amount.
3.The learned C.I.T(A) failed to appreciate that the Assessing Officer [A.O] not only examined books of account but also vouchers produced by the assessee and recorded that out of cash payments of Rs.2,01,49,199/- for which evidence was sought, the assessee produced details and vouchers for payments aggregating to Rs.1,88,35,721/- and in the face of such level of compliance, it was not rational and reasonable to hold that the assessee's case was one of absence of evidence.
4.The learned C.I.T(A) ought to have appreciated that the A.O exercised judicious discretion and made disallowance at 10% based on the state of accounts and after taking into all the facts and circumstances of the case and same ought not to have been uprooted in a summary manner.
5.The learned C.I.T(A) ought to have appreciated that the assessee got its account audited u/s.12A(b) of the Act and furnished a report in Form No.10B quantifying the amount applied for charitable purposes and that there were no qualifications in the said report about any :- 3 -:
Hyderabad Cricket Association (Cross appeals) unvouched expenditure warranting a sweeping finding that an amount of Rs.88,28,563 cannot be accepted as spent for charitable purposes.
6.Without prejudice to the preceding grounds of appeal, the learned C.I.T(A) is not justified in enhancing the disallowance mentioned in ground No 2 above without affording an opportunity to the assessee.
7.The learned C.I.T(A) erred in holding that the donation of Rs.5,00,000/- made by the assessee to the Hyderabad Hockey Association assessee is to be treated as not having been applied in accordance with the objects of the assessee.
8. The learned C.I.T(A) ought to have appreciated that the donation made to Hyderabad Hockey Association was an act of reciprocity in relation to a premier sister association.
9. The learned C.I.T(A) erred in not adjudicating upon and directing deletion of disallowance of Rs.1,21,20,367/- made U/s.40(a)(ia)".
3. Both the learned representative are very much ad idem during the course of hearing that the factual position is no different in the latter two assessment year i.e., AYs.2010-11 and 2011-12 as well. We notice in this factual backdrop and in view of the agreement between the parties qua the clinching fact that the very issue(s) have been arising between the parties in earlier assessment years due to failure on assessee's part to produce the relevant bills and vouchers of the expenditure, claim(s) and recipient's confirmations. We are next taken to the tribunal's co-ordinate bench's order in AYs.2006-07 and 2007-08 in assessee's appeals ITA Nos. 509 and 510/Hyd/2015, dt.25-10-2017 restoring the said identical issues back to the Assessing Officer for his afresh factual verification. Learned authorised representative also sought to highlight the fact that the consequential assessment(s) framed in furtherance to the tribunal's directions have accepted that assessed expenditure claim(s) as incurred only and exclusively :- 4 -:
Hyderabad Cricket Association (Cross appeals) during the course of its core activities/purposes. We therefore deem it appropriate in this factual backdrop that larger interest of justice would be served if all these issues involving varying sums of money in the three assessment years also follow the suit. We order accordingly. It is made clear that the assessee or its authorised representative shall appear before the Assessing Officer on or before 31-08-2021 with all the necessary detailed evidence(s) to be followed by consequential factual verification within three effective opportunities at its own risk and responsibility. These assessee's appeals ITA Nos. 511, 512 & 513/Hyd/2015 are accepted for statistical purposes in above terms.
4. Next come the Revenue's three appeals ITA Nos.533, 534 & 780/Hyd/2015, raising the following identical issue(s).
"1.The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is erroneous both on facts and in law.
2.The Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the registration of the assessee stands restored as on date, and that exemption u/s.11 cannot be denied to the assessee for reasons of absence of registration.
3.The Ld.CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that, when the Hon'ble ITAT in its order in ITA No.1228/Hyd/2012 dt.26.03.2014, have set aside the earlier dated 31.05.2012 of the DIT(E) passed u/s.12AA(3) cancellinq registration in the case of the assessee, with a direction to him to pass a fresh order giving an opportunity to the assessee, under that circumstances, it cannot be said that registration of the assessee stands restored as on date.
4.The Ld.CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that when following the said order of the Hon'ble ITAT in ITA No.1228/Hyd/2012 dt.26.03.2014, the matter of cancellation of registration in the case of the assessee was pending before the CIT(E) (formerly DIT(E)), the Ld.CIT(A) was not correct in holding that the registration of the assessee stands restored as on date.
5.The Ld.CIT(A) erred in holding that the activity and sources of income in the case of the assessee are similar to that of the Tamil :- 5 -:
Hyderabad Cricket Association (Cross appeals) Nadu Cricket Association and that the assessee was not engaged in activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business and therefore, is eligible for exemption u/s.11.
6.The Ld.CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the assessee has carried on several activities which are not in accordance with its objects as discussed in the order dated 31.05.2012 of the DIT(E), which entailed cancellation of registration u/s,12AA(3) in the case of the assessee, and while setting aside the said order of the DIT(E), directing him to pass fresh order after giving an opportunity to the assessee, the Hon'ble ITAT has not given any decision on the merit of such finding given by the DIT(E).
7.At this stage, it may be further mentioned that consequent to the said order of the Hon'ble ITAT in ITA No.1228/Hyd/2012, the CIT(E), in the mean time, vide his order dated 13.03.2015, passed u/s.12AA(3) afresh, has cancelled the registration in the case of the assessee w.e.f. 01.10.2004 and hence, the assessee is not eligible for exemption u/s.11 of the Act for the Asst. Year 2008-09.
8. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of hearing of the appeal".
5. Ld.CIT-DR vehemently contended during the course of hearing that the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in treating this assessee as having a valid Section 12AA registration despite the fact that the tribunal's order dt.26-03- 2014 (supra) had only restored the issue back to the CIT(Exemptions) that the question as to whether the assessee has a valid 12AA registration or not, already stands adjudicated in its appeal ITA No.649/Hyd/2015, wherein this tribunal's co-ordinate bench's order dt.13-10-2016 has allowed its grounds against the CIT(Exemptions)'s order dt.31- 05-2012 (first round) and dt.13-03-2015 (second round); respectively. Once that is the case, the Revenue's arguments that the assessee does not have Section 12AA registration is merely a technical aspect not having any material bearing on the instant three appeals. The same are rejected therefore.
:- 6 -:
Hyderabad Cricket Association (Cross appeals) No other argument or ground has been pressed before us at either party's behest.
6. To sum-up, assessee's appeals ITA Nos.511, 512 & 513/Hyd/2015 are treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms and the Revenue's cross appeals ITA Nos.533, 534 & 780/Hyd/2015 are dismissed. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.
Order pronounced in the open court on 8 th March, 2021 Sd/- Sd/-
( A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) ( S.S. GODARA )
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Hyderabad,
Dated: 08-03-2021
TNMM
:- 7 -:
Hyderabad Cricket Association
(Cross appeals)
Copy to :
1.Hyderabad Cricket Association, Rajiv Gandhi
International Cricket Stadium, Visaka Cricket Ground, Plot Nos.1 to 5, Tarnaka-Uppal Road, Hyderabad.
2.The Joint Director of Income Tax (Exemptions), Hyderabad.
3.The Dy.Director of Income Tax (Exemptions)-II, Hyderabad.
4. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Hyderabad.
5.The Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Hyderabad.
6.CIT(Appeals)-9, Hyderabad.
7.CIT-Exemptions, Hyderabad.
8.D.R. ITAT, Hyderabad.
9.Guard File.