2016 (1) TMI 1287

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....C.l.T. (Exemption), Lucknow is contrary to the provisions of Law since assessment order is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the Interest of Revenue. (2) The Ld. C.I.T.(Exemption), erred on facts and in law in holding that Development funds received from students Rs. 5.12,67,100- 00 had not been shown as Income without appreciating that the same has been added as Surplus while computing the funds utilized u/s 11 of I.T. Act in the annexure to form 10B of Audit Report and considered in assessment.  (3) The Ld. C.l.T. (Exemption) did not appreciated that the development funds has been utilized for construction of College Building. Required details regarding receiving as well as funds utilized for construction has been examined by ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ges 29 to 37 of the compilation of the assessee. Since the Assessing Officer has followed its view taken in earlier assessment year and adjudicated the issue, the assessment order cannot be called to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Ld. counsel for the assessee further contended that CIT(Exemption) has not made out a case that on account of receipt of development fund, the exemption granted u/s 11 can be withdrawn as it amount to a capitation fees. The Assessing Officer has already taken this amount in the income and expenditure account and thereafter credited it to the balance sheet. At the most, the order of the Assessing Officer can only be called erroneous by not examining the fact but it is not prejudicial t....