Ita/1292/2009 Of The Commr. Of Income Tax v. Markaz Saadathil Daraini Al

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN FRIDAY, THE 19TH MARCH 2010 / 28TH PHALGUNA 1931 ITA.No. 1292 of 2009() ---------------------- ITA.35/COCH/2007 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/APPELLANT ----------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,THRISSUR BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------ MARKAZ SADATHIL DARAINI AL-ISLAMIYYA BANATHI YATHEEMKHANA AND AGATHI MANDIRAM, NELLIKKATTIRI POST, PALAKKAD. ADV. DR.K.B.MUHAMED KUTTY, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.K.M.FIROZ THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. --------------------------- I.T.Appeal No. 1292 OF 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 19[th ]day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T Ramachandran Nair, J. The question raised in this appeal relates to the denial ofexemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act for the reason thatfunds of the respondent assessee were diverted to the managingcommittee members which is in violation of Section 13(2)(c) of the IncomeTax Act. 2. We heard the standing counsel appearing for the appellantand Sri. K.B.Mohamed Kutty, appearing for the respondent as well. 3. We find from the Tribunal's order that the amount involved is rent deposit and rent advance paid to treasurer and managing committeemember for the building taken by the respondent on lease. On facts, theTribunal found that there is nothing abnormal in the transaction and thetransactions are bonafide rental arrangement. In view of these findings onfacts, we do not find any substantial question of law arising from the orderof the Tribunal. Consequently appeal is dismissed. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR (JUDGE ) P.S.GOPINATHAN (JUDGE )