Ita/15/2018 Of Pr Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) v. M/S Children's Education Society

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU|ON THE 19 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2018 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH| AND| THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1L5 OF 201 BEIWEEN: | 1PR. COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS),INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), BENGALURU. 2.|THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF |INCOME TAX,INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, BENGALURU. ... APPELLANTS | (BY SRI E.I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. CHILDREN’S EDUCATION SOCIETYNO.40, 1 PHASE,|NO.40, 1 PHASE,| J.P. NAGAR,BENGALURU. .., RESPONDENT THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL [IS FILED UNDERSECTION 260-A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961,|PRAYING TO DECIDE THE FOREGOING QUESTION OF|LAW AND/OR SUCH OTHER QUESTIONS OF LAW AS|MAY BE FORMULATED BY THE HON’BLE COURT AS)DEEMED FIT AND SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER|DATED 14-0/7-2016 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAXAPPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘CC. BENCH, BANGALORE, INAPPEAL PROCEEDINGS NO. I.T.A. NO.2155/BNG/2016|FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-114. THIS INCOME TAK APPEAL COMING ON FORORDERS THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH, J., DELIVERED|THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Heard Sri E.I. Sanmathi, learned counsel for tne|appellants. 2. The following substantial questions of lawarise for consideration: /.Whether on the facts and In the'circumstancesOf|theCd’S€the| Tribunal ts right in nolding— thatassessee is entitied for exemption|under Section 11 of the Act pbyfollowing its earlier order which has|not reached finality? i.Whether on tne facts and in the|circumstancesOf|theCaSe€,theTribunal is rignt in taw in holaing|assessing autnority ts not right in|makingadditionsIn|respectOf|building fund of Rs.11,44,245/- and)infrastructure development fund of|Rs.8,58,34,295/-aS|incomedsassessee failed to substantiate Its.claim?circumstancesOf|theCaSe€,theTribunal is rignt in taw in holaing|assessing autnority ts not right in|makingadditionsIn|respectOf|building fund of Rs.11,44,245/- and)infrastructure development fund of|Rs.8,58,34,295/-aS|incomedsassessee failed to substantiate Its.claim? 3. Learned counsel for the appellants submitsthat the substantial questions of law that arise for'consideration in this appeal is covered by the judgment|of this Court in the case of THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME|TAX Vv. GARDEN CITY EDUCATIONAL TRUST [(2011)330.TTR.480.(KARN)|andIn|tneCASCOf|COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER v..CHILDREN'S EDUCATION SOCIETY [{(2013) 358 ITR0373] respectively. Following the aforesaid judgments of this Court, the substantial questions of law are answered in favour| of the assessee and against the Revenue. The appeal| is, accordingly, disposed off. | SD/-SD/-|JUDGE|JUDGE kKVK