TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal allows appeals on tax issues, directs reassessment.</h1> <h3>AMC Gopalapuram, Penugonda, Narsapuram, Tanuku, Attili, Polavaram, Undi, Akividu, Kovvur Versus ITO Ward-2, Tanuku</h3> AMC Gopalapuram, Penugonda, Narsapuram, Tanuku, Attili, Polavaram, Undi, Akividu, Kovvur Versus ITO Ward-2, Tanuku - TMI Issues Involved:1. Exemption u/s 11 & 12 of the Act.2. Corresponding allowance of expenditure.3. Claim of depreciation.4. Plurality of objects in form no.10.5. Reopening of assessment u/s 148.6. Exemption u/s 10(26AAB).Summary:Issue 1: Exemption u/s 11 & 12 of the ActThe first issue pertains to the non-granting of benefit u/s 11(2) due to delay in filing form no.10 and accumulation for several objects. The CIT(A) allowed the assessee's contention to accept the form no.10 based on the Supreme Court's decision in CIT Vs. Nagpur Hotel Owners Association, but upheld the assessing officer's contention that the notice for accumulation did not specify a specific purpose. The Tribunal directed the assessing officer to reconsider the claim of section 11(2) in light of relevant judgments, restoring the issue for fresh examination.Issue 2: Corresponding Allowance of ExpenditureThe second issue involves the grant of relief for various payments made as per the directions of the Director of Marketing, which the assessing officer did not allow. The CIT(A) sustained the addition due to the absence of the Director's directions. The Tribunal referred to the Andhra Pradesh High Court's decision in CIT Vs. Agricultural Market Committee, Giddalore, which recognized the government's power to direct such payments. The Tribunal directed the assessing officer to verify and allow the claims as per the Director's directions.Issue 3: Claim of DepreciationThe third issue concerns the claim of depreciation not allowed due to lack of details. The Tribunal cited various judicial authorities, including the Punjab & Haryana High Court in CIT Vs. Market Committee, Pipli, which upheld that depreciation is allowable on capital assets from the income of charitable trusts. The Tribunal directed the assessing officer to allow the depreciation after obtaining necessary details from the assessee.Issue 4: Plurality of Objects in Form No.10In some appeals, the assessing officer denied exemption u/s 11(2) due to alleged violation of section 13 and plurality of objects in form no.10. The Tribunal, referring to the first issue, restored the matter to the assessing officer for fresh examination.Issue 5: Reopening of Assessment u/s 148In several appeals, the ground on reopening the assessment u/s 148 was not pressed and accordingly treated as withdrawn.Issue 6: Exemption u/s 10(26AAB)The issue of exemption u/s 10(26AAB) was considered against the assessee by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in a batch of appeals involving various Agricultural Market Committees. The Tribunal dismissed the grounds related to this issue.Conclusion:The Tribunal restored various issues to the assessing officer for fresh consideration and verification, allowing the appeals partly for statistical purposes. The Tribunal directed the assessing officer to consider the issues accordingly, following the principles laid down in relevant judicial decisions.
TaxTMI 