2016 (5) TMI 709

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s registered as charitable institution under Section 12AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). During the year under consideration, the assessee claimed depreciation on the capital asset. However, the Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of the assessee and granted exemption under Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act. The assessee challenged the order of the Assessing Officer before the CIT(Appeals) as far as it relates to disallowance of depreciation on the capital asset. The CIT(Appeals) without considering the grounds raised before him, proceeded on the presumption that there was violation of Section 13(1)(b) of the Act. The CIT(Appeals) found that the assessee- Sangam was established for the benefit of a particular cast....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eals) passed the order on 26.03.2015. 4. The Ld.counsel for the assessee further submitted that when the issue raised by the assessee before the CIT(Appeals) is only depreciation on the capital asset, the CIT(Appeals) cannot travel beyond the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee before him. Referring to the grounds of appeal filed before the CIT(Appeals), the Ld.counsel submitted that other than disallowance of depreciation in respect of capital asset, no other issue was raised before the CIT(Appeals). Therefore, the CIT(Appeals) exceeded his jurisdiction for disallowing the claim of exemption under Section 11 of the Act, since such a power was not conferred on the CIT(Appeals). The CIT(Appeals) is expected to adjudicate the issue rais....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... sufficient enough to file its objection. Therefore, he submitted that he leaves the matter to the discretion of the Tribunal. 5. Referring to the contention of the Ld.counsel for the assessee that the CIT(Appeals) has exceeded his jurisdiction in holding that the assessee is not entitled for exemption under Section 11 of the Act, the Ld. D.R. submitted that the power of the CIT(Appeals) is co-terminus with that of the Assessing Officer. Therefore, according to the Ld. D.R., what the Assessing Officer omitted to consider, the CIT(Appeals) can very well consider the same provided an opportunity given to the assessee. In the case before us, according to the Ld. D.R., the Assessing Officer has not considered the violation of Section 13(1)(b) ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... letter dated 17.03.2015 asked the assessee to furnish its objection, if any, for disallowing the claim under Section 11 of the Act or Section 10(23C) of the Act. The assessee now claims before this Tribunal that the letter dated 17.03.2015 was not served on it and the working said to be provided to the assessee by the CIT(Appeals) was also not furnished. Admittedly, the CIT(Appeals) passed the order on 26.03.2015. Therefore, from the date of issue of letter and the date of passing the order, the time limit available was only 9 days. If the CIT(Appeals) dispatched the letter dated 17.03.2015 by post, then the same would have been received after two or three days. Then, the available time would be only 5 or 6 days. If for any reason, the let....