TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (7) TMI 543
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....23rd May, 1994. It filed its return of income on 30th September, 2013 declaring nil income. The AO, during the course of assessment proceedings noted that the activities of the society are to promote the general mercantile and industrial interest of India acting as arbitrator in settlement of disputes, organizing periodical seminars, meetings and symposia with government. As per Income & Expenditure account the assessee had shown total receipts of Rs. 21,67,04,511. From the details furnished by the assessee, he noted that the income includes income from members and non-members as well. 3. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO asked the assessee to explain as to why the receipts from charges received by the Chamber should....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the IT Act. He, therefore, held that the assessee is not entitled to exemption u/s 11 and 12 of the Act. The AO accordingly determined the total income of the assessee at Rs. 3,32,38,822/- after deducting the expenditure as per Income & Expenditure Account from the total income. 4. In appeal, the ld.CIT(A) held that the activities of the assessee are charitable and the assessee is eligible for deduction u/ss 11, 13(1) and 13(2) of the Act. 5. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds:- "1. On the basis of facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the fact that the assessee is not eligible for exemption u/s ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bunal, vide ITA No.1388/Del/2015, order dated 23rd May, 2018 at para 7 of the order upheld the order of the CIT(A) in allowing claim of exemption u/s 11 of the IT Act and dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue by observing as under:- "7. The only issue for denying the exemption u/s.11 by the learned Assessing Officer is that in terms of proviso to Section 2(15) the assessee's activities are in the nature of trade and commerce or business. We find that first of all in the Assessment Years 2006-07 & 2007-08, the Hon'ble High Court after detailed discussion had held that assessee is eligible for claim of exemption u/s.11, vide judgment and order dated 19th October, 2012 in ITA No.368 & 369/2012. Again for the Assessment Yea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by the Hon'ble High Court was further followed by the Hon'ble High Court itself, vide order dated 27.07.2016 pertains to the AY 2008-09 & 2009-10. Even otherwise, in the instant case, the Ld. CIT (A) has categorically held in para no. 4.5 of the impugned order that the case of the assessee is covered in favour of the assessee by the orders of his predecessor for the AY 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008- 09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 and also by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the assessee's own case for the AY 2006-07 and 2007-08 which required to be followed. As the Ld. DR also raised an issue that post amendment to the proviso to Section 2(15) of the Act , the situation has become altogether different from the AY 2009-10 onwards and the ac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....non-members of the institution are more and as such the principle of mutuality is apparently not applicable in the case of the assessee. We further note that the case of the assessee is covered in its favour by the orders of the Ld. CIT(A)'s predecessors for the Assessment years 2006-07 to 2011-12 and also by the order of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in assessee's own case for the AY 2006-07 & 2007-08. The Departmental Appeal for the AY 2008-09 & 2009-10 has also been dismissed by the Tribunal. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly observed that there is no sufficient reason to deviate from the appellate orders of the Ld. CIT(A) of the earlier years allowing the exemption u/s. 11(1) and accordingly, the AO was directed to allow ....