TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (10) TMI 1205
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e when the AO had categorically found in course of assessment that the necessary conditions for the exemption wee not fulfilled by the assessee during the relevant assessment year. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) is not justified in accepting the contentions of the assessee and not accepting the findings of the AO in violation of Rule 46A of the IT Rules." 3. The appeal is time barred by 1510 days. The revenue has filed condonation petition u/s. 253(5) of the Income tax Act, 1961, wherein, it is stated that the appellate order dated 27.3.2013 passed by the ld. CIT(A)-II, Bhubaneswar was received in the office of CIT on 13.5.2013. However, due to restructuring of the department, the office of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,752/-. 2. The crux of the case is that the AO had observed in the beginning of his assessment order that although in the case of this appellant registration u/s. 12AA had been granted, it would not be entitled to the benefit of Sec. 11 "because of the reasons elaborately discussed hereunder". As a matter of fact, unless there is a conclusive decision on this issue, the disallowance/additions under different heads would not be of any meaning or importance because the heads of expenditure would not be relevant as expenditure would then be relevant as application of income. Therefore, it is important to make some analysis of the AO's observation against grant of benefit u/s. 11. 3. The trust is accumulating funds in the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppellant trust through its chairman has been described as "owner". The AO felt that there was no committee of any kind for appointment of contractors and suppliers and the chairman had dictatorial powers of functioning. Although this discussion has been made under the head "improper maintenance of accounts", here the AO is basically questioning the functioning of the trust itself. It is however not brought on record that the trust was functioning in contravention of the; provision of registered trust deed. Therefore, it is best left to the trust as to how the trustees manage its functioning on the basis of their mandate. The AO is not empowered to substitute his views for such functioning at all. This will not contravene any provision of Se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....expenditure not being supported by proper evidence. He has rather stated that it was not established that the visit of the chairman was only for the purpose of college and secondly an expenditure of Rs. 4,79,000/- for 2 to 3 days for 11 members appeared to him to be excessive. Accordingly, the AO is of the opinion that expenses would be hit by the provisions of Sec. 13(2)(1) of the I.T. Act. 5.1. I have carefully gone into the details pertaining to the aforesaid expenditure. It is seen that for the governing body meeting, seven members had come from USA. The Chairman Dr. R.K Mishra and his family members and friend who were governing body members and were NRIs and were staying in USA. These members had come for the meeting by beari....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... explained as follows: "Due to frequent transfer of files during the protracted course of hearing, three bills/money receipts were misplaces amounting to Rs. 1,07,669/- (Rs. 5,7451- + Rs. 1,924 + Rs. 1,00,000/-) out of total expenses of Rs. 36,11,228/-. Out of Rs. 1,07,669/-, two small amounts were made in cash and Rs. 1,00,000/- was made in cheque. Request was made to the parties for issue of duplicate bills/receipts which could not be produced before the remand officer since the concerned parties have not complied to our request. 6.1. Even if one presumes that the bills are not available for these expenses, I do not understand as to how that will contribute in any way for rejection of the appellant's claim u/s. 11. I....