TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (12) TMI 991
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 2. The Revenue has raised following common grounds of appeal, which read as under: "1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the assessee club is a mutual concern disregarding the finding of A.O. that the financial and administrative control over the assessee club is in hands of HUDA and the society fails on the fundamental pre-requisite of identity of all the mutual concern. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing relief to the assessee on the basis of decision of Hon'ble ITAT, Chandigarh in the assessee's own case relating to earlier year when the club does not fulfill the principle of mutuality as laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the cas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....thdrawal of the said amount and the use to which it could be put was totally in the hands of management of club. The claim of the assessee before the Assessing Officer was that in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Bankipur Club [226 ITR 97 (SC), the income was exempt. The Assessing Officer held that from the facts of the case, the nature of its management and the involvement of HUDA in the affairs of the assessee club infers that the doctrine of mutuality was missing and hence the income of the assessee was held to be taxable. The Assessing Officer in respect of interest from bank further observed as under: "The profit made on account of interest from banks went to increase the funds of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... from the banks would not fall within the ambit of mutuality principles and would, therefore, be exigible to tax in the hands of the assessee club. It is further pointed out by the learned D.R. for the Revenue that in the case of Bangalore Club Vs. CIT & Others (supra) the assessee had included the interest on FDRs of amounts received from non corporate members as taxable and the others as non-taxable. However, in the case of the present assessee before us the total income was shown as exempt. 11. The learned A.R. for the assessee vehemently argued that no such ground of appeal qua interest income was raised by the Revenue in the grounds of appeal. The second contention of learned A.R. for the assessee was that similar grounds were raise....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ands. Further the assessee during the year under consideration had received interest on FDRs and also interest on saving account which was also claimed as exempt from tax following the principles of mutuality. We find that similar issue arose in assessee's own case in ITA No.777/Chd/2007 relating to assessment year 2004-05 - order dated 29.1.2008, which was followed by the Tribunal in ITA No. 152/Chd/2012 relating to assessment year 2008-09 in assessee's own case - order dated 21.6.2012. In view of the ratio laid down by the Tribunal in assessee's own case we uphold the order of the CIT (Appeals) in applying the principles of mutuality to the receipts received by the assessee from its members. However, in view of the ratio laid down by the ....