Madhya Pradesh High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S Arch Diocese Of Bhopal Judgement ... on 9 April, 2014
I.T.A. No :: 111 / 2009
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s Arch Diocese of Bhopal
09.04.2014.
Shri Sanjay Lal for the appellant.
This is revenue's appeal under section 260-A of the Income
Tax Act, 1961, calling in question the concurrent orders passed by
the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal in the matter of assessment of income for the
respondent/Institute, for the Assessment Year 2003-2004.
Respondent is an Educational Institute registered under the MP Societies Registrikaran Act. It is also registered under section 12-A(a) of the Income Tax Act and is engaged in the vocation of running various educational institutes. The Institute filed return and claimed exemption under section 10(23-C)(iii ab) in respect of certain amount received from donors to be contributed towards the corpus of the Institute. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim, but the Commissioner (Appeal) and the Tribunal having allowed the same, the appeal is filed mainly on the ground that for permitting deduction of the amount on the ground of the same not being an income, it is argued that the appellate authorities have committed an error and, therefore, the appeal has been filed.
The substantial questions of law indicated in this appeal are as to whether in deleting the disallowance of capital expenditure, the appellate authorities and the Tribunal have committed error.
Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and on going through the grounds and reasons given by the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal, it is seen that after taking note of the provisions of section 11(1) in the light of 2 section 2(24) of the Income Tax Act, import and meaning of the word 'income', it is found that if the amount is given by way of donation and the intention of the donor is specifically to contribute to the corpus of the society/institute, it is held that the amount will not form the income in view of the amendment made to the definition with effect from 1.4.1989.
Concurrent findings have been recorded by the authorities in the matter and now we see no reason to interfere into the matter.
That apart, the other grounds raised in the matter of assessment and the benefit granted by the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal are concurrent findings of fact, based on appreciation of the evidence that has come on record and no substantial question of law arises for consideration thereto.
Accordingly, finding no ground to interfere, the appeal is dismissed.
( RAJENDRA MENON ) ( A.K. SHARMA )
JUDGE JUDGE
Aks/-