2015 (3) TMI 1297

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the ld. CIT(A) has erred in:- (i) allowing the benefit of quantified carried forward losses to the assessee against the income of the assessee." 2.2 The assessee has raised following grounds in its cross objection. "1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(Appeals), Jaipur-II, Jaipur has erred in affirming the action of Assessing Officer in denying the exemption u/s 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 to the appellant society by invoking the provisions of section 13(2)(a) and 13(1)(d) of the Act. 2. Under the facts & circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(Appeals), Jaipur-II, Jaipur has erred in affirming the action of the Ld. Assessing officer In:- a. considering the amount transferred to the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he provisions of section 11 of the Act." 2.3 During the course of hearing, the ld. Counsel for the assessee contends that the issue in question is similar to assessment year 2008-09 in assessee's own case. The ld. CIT(A) has passed the order in question allowing set off of carried forward losses to the assessee by following the ITAT judgement which is evident from following para 9 of ld. CIT(A)'s order. "9. for the sake of clarification for the year under consideration there was a positive income, and therefore, assessee has filed its return showing the income of the year, exemption u/s 11 of the Act has been claimed. If the carry forward losses are allowed to be set off then the income will become of negative figure and therefore, e....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he AO will grant consequent relief, if any. 5. Now we will take up the ground Nos. 8 of the assessee. 6. The ld. Counsel of the assessee stated that in earlier year the assessee's total income was of loss and, therefore, the assessee has not claimed any exemption under section 11 neither it was allowed. It was also submitted that assessee applied for exemption of its income under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act. The ld. Chief Commissioner of Income-tax vide his order dated 22.3.2006 had rejected the application of the assessee and this fact has been mentioned in the order passed for the assessment year 2004-05, copy of which is placed at paper book pages 66-70. It was submitted that in earlier year's assessment has been completed and dep....