Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Chouhaneducation Society

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH I.T.A. No. 192/2009 (Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s ChouhanEducation Society) --Jabalpur, Dated: 20022018 Shri Sanjay Lal, learned counsel for the appellant. I.A. No. 6359/2014 for exemption from filing certifiedcopy of the impugned order is allowed for the reasonsmentioned therein namely that the certified copy hasalready been filed along with I.T.A. No. 199/2009. Heard on the question of admission. It is informed that I.T.A. No.199/2009 and I.T.A. No.188/2009 filed by the Revenue against the samerespondents raising same and identical question of lawhas been dismissed by this Court on 05.04.2016. Theorder passed by this Court in I.T.A. No. 188/2009 and I.T.A.No. 199/2009 on 05.04.2016 is in the following terms : “In all these cases, appeals filed underSection 260-A of the Income Tax Act,Revenue has called in question concurrentorders passed by the CommissionerAppeals and the Income Tax AppellateTribunal in the matter of upholding certaindeletions granted by the CommissionerAppeals. 2.Facts in all the cases go to show thatthe Societies in question namely theAssessee received various grants in aid from the government and utilized thegrants for the purpose of creating capitalassets like construction of School Building,Girls Hostels or purchase of Equipments foruse in the institute. The assessing officertreated the grant to be income andassessed it for tax, however, theCommissioner Appeal and the AppellateTribunal found that the grants werereceived from the government by thesociety for creation of capital assets likeBuilding and other Equipments and as thesame has been used for the said purposeonly and it is a capital assets, not income,therefore, not taxable. It was held that theaid received is in the nature of capitalasset, is capital revenue and not income,therefore, the finding of the learnedassessing officer has been interfered with.In doing so, no error had been committedby the learned Authorities warrantingconsideration the concurrent findingrecorded by the Commissioner and theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal are inaccordance with the requirement of law.We see no substantial question involvedwarranting consideration. 3.Accordingly, appeals are dismissed.” b In view of the aforesaid, as identical issue hasalready been rejected by this Court, we do not find anysubstantial question of law arising for entertaining thepresent appeal, which is dismissed in similar terms as theorder passed in I.T.A. No.188/2009 and I.T.A. No.199/2009. (R.S. Jha) (Nandita Dubey) Judge Judge Digitally signed by BHARTI GADGE Date: 2018.02.21 11:09:59 +05'30'