Commissioner Of Income Tax,Hisar v. Market Committee, Fatehabad

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. --- Income Tax Appeal No. 211 of 2011 Date of decision: 21.7.2011 Commissioner of Income Tax,Hisar --- Appellant Versus Market Committee, Fatehabad --- Respondent CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOELACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL --- Present:Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Standing Counsel for theappellant-revenue. --- AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income-Tax Act,1961 (for short “the Act”) has been filed by the revenue against theorder dated 25.6.2010, passed by the Income Tax Appellate TribunalDelhi Bench ‘E’, New Delhi (in short “the Tribunal”) in ITA No.1747/Del/2010, relating to the assessment year 2007-08. 2.The following substantial questions of law have beenclaimed for determination of this Court: “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in holding that theexpenditure of Rs. 82,50,000/- claimed to have beencase, the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in holding that theexpenditure of Rs. 82,50,000/- claimed to have been contributed to HSAM Board under statutory obligation byvirtue of Section 27 of the Punjab Agricultural ProduceMarket Act, 1961 is allowable without appreciating that noevidence could be produced by the assessee to provethat such expenditure was actually incurred and whethersuch contribution can be treated to fall within the ambit ofapplication of income for charitable purposes as definedin Section 2(15) of the Act? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, thelearned ITAT was justified in holding that the assesseehas fulfilled the mandatory requirements of Section 11(2)without specifically mentioning the definite purpose orpurposes of accumulation in Form No. 10.”learned ITAT was justified in holding that the assesseehas fulfilled the mandatory requirements of Section 11(2)without specifically mentioning the definite purpose orpurposes of accumulation in Form No. 10.” 3. Learned counsel for the appellant fairly submitted thatquestion No.1 is covered by the decision of this Court in Income TaxAppeal No. 151 of 2010 (Commissioner of Income Tax, Hisar vs.Market Committee, Narwana), decided on 5.7.2010, and questionNo.2 is covered by the decision in Income Tax Appeal No. 823 of2010 (Commissioner of Income Tax, Hisar vs. Market Committee,Tohana), decided on 28.1.2011 where the appeals preferred by therevenue had been dismissed. 4.In view of the above, the appeal is dismissed. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE