Ita/28/2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Exemptions) v. M/S.gospel For Asia

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI FRIDAY ,THE 29TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 8TH CHAITHRA, 1941 ITA.No. 28 of 2019 AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA.NO.91/COCH/2016 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHINBENCH DATED 16-05-2018 APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTIONS)KOCHI. BY ADVS.SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAMSRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE: M/S.GOSPEL FOR ASIA,MANJADI, THIRUVALLA – 689 103. THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.03.2019,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. & R. NARAYANA PISHARADI, J. ---------------------------------------- ITA.No.28 of 2019 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 29[th] day of March, 2019 JUDGMENT C.K.Abdul Rehim, J: The Commissioner of Income-Tax(Exemptions) has filedthe above appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short), challenging the order passed by theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench inI.T.A.No.91/Coch/2016 dated 16.05.2018. 2.The substantial question of law indicated in theMemorandum of appeal is as follows:- “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT is right in deleting theadditions made u/s 11(3) for non application ofincome accumulated u/s 11(2), on the basis of anerroneous order of the assessing officer, presumablyu/s 11(3A) even through the assessing officer did nothave authority u/s 11(3A) for extending the time available for utilization of set apart income u/s 11(2)beyond 5 years?” 3.From the facts it is realized that, during therelevant period, the assessee was enjoying an order underSection 11(3A) of the Act issued by the Assessing Officer.The Tribunal had found that the said order passed underSection 11(3A) of the Act was not cancelled or modified byany higher Authority and it was surviving. Hence it wasfound that the assessee cannot be denied of the benefitsunder Section 11(2) of the Act. The additions made underSection 11(3), alleging non application of the accumulatedincome cannot be sustained, in view of the order obtained bythe assessee under Section 11(3A), which was in force. 4.We do not think that there is any error, illegality,impropriety or purversity in the order passed by the Tribunal,especially in view of the provisions contained under Section11(3A) that once the Assessing Officer allow the assessee toapply the income for such other charitable or religiouspurposes, as is specified in the application, which is in conformity with the objects of the trust, then the provisionsof Section 3 shall apply, as if the purpose specified by suchassessee will be deemed to be a purpose specified in thenotice given to the Assessing Officer under Section 11(2A). 5.Based on the above finding, we do not think thereexists any substantial question of law, which need be decidedunder Section 260A in this appeal. Consequently, the above appeal fails and the same ishereby dismissed. Sd/- C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE Sd/- R. NARAYANA PISHARADI JUDGE DK APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE ATRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S.143(3)R.W.S. 147 OF THE IT ACT DATED 03.03.2014. ANNEXURE BTRUE COPY OF THE APPELLATE ORDER OF THECOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED21.12.2018. ANNEXURE CCOPY OF THE ORDER OF INCOME TAX APPELLATETRIBUNAL IN ITA.NO.91/COCH/2016 DATED16.05.2018 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE DK