Itta/281/2013 Of M/S. National Academy Of Construction v. Asst. Director Of Income Tax ( Exempetions)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA ANDTHE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO.281 OF 2013 DATED:16.7.2013 Between: M/s. National Academy of ConstructionNAC Campus, Kondapur PostCyberbad, HyderabadRep. By its Director GeneralSri Pradip Kumar Agarwal … Appellant And Asst. Director of Inocme Tax (Exemptions)Aayakar Bhavan, BasheerbaghHyderabad … Respondent THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA ANDTHE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI I.T.T.A. NO.281 OF 2013 JUDGMENT:(per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta) This appeal is preferred without indicating any grounds. Thequestions of law forumated appear to be questions of fact. We just record the suggested questions of law in this matter: A.“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, theTribunal was correct in not accepting the submissions thatsubscription to the equity of a company, with the objects identical tothe objects of the Appellant Trust and in furtherance of Appellant’sown objectives is application of the income of the Trust for itsobjects, and not investment as contemplated in Sections 11 and 13of the Income Tax Act, 1961?Tribunal was correct in not accepting the submissions thatsubscription to the equity of a company, with the objects identical tothe objects of the Appellant Trust and in furtherance of Appellant’sown objectives is application of the income of the Trust for itsobjects, and not investment as contemplated in Sections 11 and 13of the Income Tax Act, 1961? B.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, theTribunal was right in not accepting the Appellant’s submissions thatthe contributions from the contractors who were awardedGovernment contracts, pursuant to G.O. Ms. No.98 dated05.07.2000, was voluntary and towards the corpus of the Appellant,and therefore not liable to tax under Section 12 of the Income TaxAct?”Tribunal was right in not accepting the Appellant’s submissions thatthe contributions from the contractors who were awardedGovernment contracts, pursuant to G.O. Ms. No.98 dated05.07.2000, was voluntary and towards the corpus of the Appellant,and therefore not liable to tax under Section 12 of the Income TaxAct?” In our view, the Tribunal has every right to reject or accept anysubmission. If a submission has not been accepted by the Tribunal, maybe rightly or wrongly, the same cannot be questioned, and this has beenprecisely done here. There is no other ground in this appeal papers sothat the Court can on its own formulate substantial question/s of law. Theappeal is therefore dismissed on that ground alone. However, liberty isgiven to the appellant to file appeal afresh in accordance with law. Noorder as to costs. ________________________ K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ ______________________ G. ROHINI, J 16.7.2013bnr