Assessing Officer/Appellant/S v. M/S Takshila Education Society Branch Office Kashi Place, Patna, B

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNAMiscellaneous Appeal No.531 of 2008 ====================================================== 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax Central, Patna. 2. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Patna. ...Assessing Officer/Appellant/s Versus M/s Takshila Education Society Branch Office Kashi Place, Patna, B-549,New Friends Colony, New Delhi. ... Assessee/Respondent/s ======================================================Appearance :For the Appellant/s: Smt. Archana Sinha, Adv. Mr. Alok Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Adv.For the Respondent/s: Mr. Ajay Kumar Rastogi, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVAORAL JUDGMENT(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN)Date : 14-02-2019 Leave is granted to Ms. Archana Sinha, learned counselappearing for the appellant-department to correct the provisionsas occurring in paragraph (v) of the substantial questions of lawto read section ‘10(23C)(vi)’ in place of ‘10(23)(vi)’ duringcourse of the day. This appeal under section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) is directedagainst the order dated 18.03.2008 passed by the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna (hereinafter referred toas ‘the Tribunal’) in ITA No.570/Pat/06 filed by the appellant-department for the assessment years 2001-02, whereby theappeal has been dismissed, thus confirming the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Patna dated27.10.2006. We have heard Ms. Archana Sinha, learned counselappearing for the Income Tax Department and Mr. Ajay KumarRastogi, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-assesseeand we have perused the records. The assessee is an educational society and apparentlyenjoying the exemption granted by the statutory authority undersection 10(23C)(vi) as well as the exemption under section 11 of‘the Act’ for which it is duly registered under section 12AA of‘the Act’. In so far as the present appeal is concerned, it is theexemption granted to the society under section 10(23C) (vi) of‘the Act’ which is the subject matter of dispute and to cut shortthe matter it is because the Commissioner, Income Tax(Appeals) has accepted the position to differ with the opinion ofthe Assessing Authority and which opinion of theCommissioner, Income Tax (Appeals) has been endorsed by ‘theTribunal’ by the order impugned that feeling aggrievedDepartment is before us. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and wehave perused the records. Ms. Archana Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-department has chosen to raise theissue present at paragraph (v) of the substantial question of lawto submit that the assessee is not entitled to exemption undersection 10(23C)(vi) of ‘the Act’, because it does not exist solelyfor educational purposes. The arguments are contested by Mr.Ajay Kumar Rastogi, learned counsel appearing for therespondent-assessee in reference to the order of the CentralBoard of Direct Taxes enclosed at Annexure R/1 series tosubmit that the appellants cannot be permitted to raise this issuein view of the exemption granted by the Central Board of DirectTaxes through the order dated 02.03.2002 which was valid forthe period 1999-2000, 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 including theassessment year in question which is a subject matter of thepresent appeal i.e. assessment year 2001-2002. It is thussubmitted that the order of ‘the Tribunal’ is in tune with thelegal position settled under the exemption granted by theCentral Board of Direct Taxes confirming the eligibility of therespondent-society to avail the exemption provided undersection 10(23C)(vi) of ‘the Act’. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and wehave perused the records and in our opinion apart from the factthat the issue raised by the department has not only been negated by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) but hasalso been confirmed by the Tribunal as well, in view of theexemption granted by the Central Board of Direct Taxes on02.03.2002 which remains uncontested, we do not see anyreason for thedepartment to prefer this appeal which issuestands answered by the exemption order of the Central Board ofDirect Taxes dated 02.03.2002. For the discussions above, we find no merit in thesubstantial question of law so raised by the Department. The Appeal is dismissed accordingly. (Jyoti Saran, J) ( Arvind Srivastava, J) Anjula/Skpathak AFR/NAFRAFRCAV DATENAUploading Date08.03.2019Transmission DateNA