Itta/166/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Vincentain Andhra Society

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JULYTWO THOUSAND AND THIRTEEN PRESENT THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICESRI KALYAN JYOTI SEN GUPTA AND THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE G.ROHINI I.T.T.A. No.166 OF 2013 Between: Commissioner of Income Tax,Vijayawada ..... Appellant AND M/s. Vincentian Andhra Society, Vincentian Nilayam,D.No.11-34, Enikepadu,Vijayawada .....Respondent The Court made the following : JUDGMENT:(per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri K.J. Sengupta) This appeal is sought to be admitted on the following suggested questions of law 1.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case the order of the Tribunal is perverse?the case the order of the Tribunal is perverse? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case, the Tribunal is correct in law in holding thatunspent amount do not exceed 15% of the grossreceipts of the asseseee and the accumulation ofincome is as per the provisions of the Act? 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case, the Tribunal is correct in law in deleting thedonation of Rs.35.00 lakhs donated to a society Viz.,Vencentian Society, Mysore, with religious objects?donation of Rs.35.00 lakhs donated to a society Viz.,Vencentian Society, Mysore, with religious objects? 4. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case, the Tribunal is correct in law in deleting theexpenditure of Rs.7,00,174/- incurred for religiouspurpose?expenditure of Rs.7,00,174/- incurred for religiouspurpose? This appeal is preferred in relation to the assessmentyear 2006-2007 against the judgment and order of the learnedTribunal dated 29.4.2010. It appears that the learned Tribunalfollowing its own order in assessee’s own case in relation tothe assessment year 2005-2006 passed the impugned order.It is submitted orally that an appeal has been preferred againstthe order passed in relation to the assessment year 2005-2006, however, there is no statement in this appeal that any appeal has been preferred against the aforesaid order inrelation to the assessment year 2005-2006 and that the orderhas been upset. Hence, we dismiss this appeal. No order asto costs. _______________________ Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, CJ. July 02, 2013MAS __________ G.Rohini, J.