TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (1) TMI 1078
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r the Societies Registration Act 1860. The Society came into existence by way of a Memorandum of Association entered into on 1.10.1991 and registered on 7.10.1991. The Society is meant for charitable purposes and the objects and aims of the Society mentioned in the Memorandum clearly indicate that all such objects are charitable in nature. The Society has no profit motive. The Society could not carry on the objects on its own due to non availability of funds. Therefore, the Society approached various donors with the proposal of carrying out the projects as per the objects. The donors like Social Education Development Trust (SEDT) Oxfam and UUAC have accepted to donate the funds for implementation of specific projects. According to the agreements entered into between the appellant Society and various donors, the grants were given for carrying out specific projects. For this purpose, specific amounts were sanctioned. The donors also prescribed time limit for completion of the project and according to the agreement the donors can collect back the amount so paid if the project is not completed. The details of subject projects undertaken, the amount received from each donor, the amount ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he CIT(A) rejected the claim of the assessee. 5. Before us, the assessee filed these appeals on 10/08/2010, belatedly, with a delay of 1720 days. Further, we have noticed that there was a short payment of appeal filing fees by Rs. 9,500/- in each appeal. In other words, the assessee paid appeal filing fee of Rs. 500/- per appeal instead of Rs. 10,000/- per appeal. 6. Before going into the other issues, first we deal with the payment of short fee. According to the learned AR the applicable filing fees to the assessee's case is only Rs. 500/- as the assessee's case falls u/s 253(6) of the IT Act. In this connection, he referred to CBDT Circular No. 779, dated 14/09/1999. According to him, the appeals filed by the assessee is not linked to the assessed income and, being so, filing fee should be considered at Rs. 500/- only. For this proposition, he relied on the decision of the ITAT Hyderabad Bench "A" in the case of AP State Electricity Board Vs. ITO, [1994] 49 ITD 522 wherein it was held as follows: "Agricultural income is income which is not to be included while computing the total income of an assessee and that is provided in clause (1) of section 10. The inclusion of agricultu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Assessing Officer has computed income of the society for assessment years 2000-01, 2001-02 and 2002-03 since registration u/s 12A was not granted for these three years, which was however granted from dated 01/04/2002 i.e. relevant to the assessment year 2003-04 onwards. Since the Commissioner has not granted registration u/s 12A, the Assessing Officer has computed income for these assessment years. 8.2 Before the Assessing Officer, the assessee claimed that amounts received from funding agencies, SEDT, OXFAM, Ford Foundation etc were received for specific projects and society never became owner of the funds and society was acting as an agent for implementation of the projects of the donors. The assessee before the Assessing Officer placed reliance on the observation of the ITAT, Hyderabad Bench in the case of Nirmal Agricultural Credit Society Vs. ITO wherein the Hon'ble ITAT observed that donations received for specific purposes do not belong to the assessee. The assessee further reported before the Assessing Officer that grants for specified purpose are not assessee's income or corpus since the assessee is acting as agent for funding agencies. The Assessing Officer while cons....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e assessment proceedings relating thereto, be accompanied by a fee of,-- (a) where the total income of the assessee as computed by the Assessing Officer, in the case to which the appeal relates, is one hundred thousand rupees or less, five hundred rupees, (b) where the total income of the assessee, computed as aforesaid, in the case to which the appeal relates is more than one hundred thousand rupees but not more than two hundred thousand rupees, one thousand five hundred rupees, (c) where the total income of the assessee, computed as aforesaid, in the case to which the appeal relates is more than two hundred thousand rupees, one per cent of the assessed income, subject to a maximum of ten thousand rupees, 10 [(d) where the subject matter of an appeal relates to any matter, other than those specified in clauses (a), (b) and (c), five hundred rupees:" 8.6 On plain reading of the above section, we find that the assessee is required to pay the appeal fee not in terms of section 253(6)(d) of the IT Act, but, it should be paid the appeal fees in terms of section 253(c) of the IT Act. According to the assessee, the case falls under clause (d) of the above section, once exemption u/s....