AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (1) TMI 277
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in not appreciating that since the Appellant received an amount of Rs. 5,07,274/- (Rupees Five Lacs Seven Thousand Two Hundred and Seventy-Four Only) towards offerings on account of 'Gurupurab and Kirtan Darbar' and incurred expenses of Rs. 3,22,837/- (Rupees Three Lacs Twenty Two Thousand Eight Hundred and Thirty Seven Only) on Kirtan and Darbar against the said receipts in the relevant Assessment Year, the assessing officer had wrongly assessed the entire receipts of Rs. 5,07,274/- (Rupees Five Lacs Seven Thousand Two Hundred and Seventy Four Only) as income without allowing the corresponding expenses and without appreciating the fact that only surplus is ta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....te. 2.4. Being aggrieved, the appellant/assessee carried the matter in appeal to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, "CIT(A)"]. The CIT(A) substantially confirmed the view taken by the CPC and thus allowed the appeal only to extent it concerned ground number 5, which pertained to exclusion of the amount received towards building fund [i.e., Rs 5,69,100/-] from the income of the appellant/assessee. 2.5. This resulted in the appellant/assessee escalating the matter to the Tribunal. The Tribunal via the impugned order, affirmed the view taken by the CIT(A). 3. It is in these circumstances that the instant appeal has been preferred and the questions of law, as indicated above, were framed. 4. Ms Shreya Jain, who appears on b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....light the fact that the entire case set up by the appellant/assessee was that it was entitled to claim exemption under Section 11 and 12 of the 1961 Act, having regard to the first proviso to Section 12A(2) of the Act. 7.1. Mr Agarwal, in this context, states that there is no dispute about the fact that the appellant/assessee had applied for registration under Section 12AA of the 1961 Act on 27.11.2015 and therefore, the provisions of Section 11 and 12 of the 1961 Act would kick in only in AY 2016-17 and thereafter. 7.2. In other words, the argument was that, for the AY in issue i.e., AY 2014-15, the appellant/assessee could not claim exemption under Section 11 and 12 of the Act, which is what has been held by the CIT(A) and confirmed by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....],- (i) the total income of any member thereof for the previous year (excluding his share from such association or body) exceeds the maximum amount which is not chargeable to tax in the case of that member under the Finance Act of the relevant year, tax shall be charged on the total income of the association or body at the maximum marginal rate; (ii) any member or members thereof is or are chargeable to tax at a rate or rates which is or are higher than the maximum marginal rate, tax shall be charged on that portion or portions of the total income of the association or body which is or are relatable to the share or shares of such member or members at such higher rate or rates, as the case may be, and the balance of the total income of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ught to have then gone on to rule on what was, really, an alternate ground, i.e., should gross receipts, simpliciter, be brought to tax . In other words, should gross receipts or the taxable income arrived at, after adjusting deductible expenses be subjected to tax? 11.1. Concerning this aspect as well, according to us, CIT(A) side-stepped the contention, although, a specific ground had been raised by the appellant/assessee in the appeal filed before the CIT(A). For the sake of easy reference, the relevant ground raised in the appeal before the CIT(A) is set forth hereafter: "....The assessing officer erred in law and on facts in considering the gross receipts of Rs.13,41,461/- as taxable income without allowing the amount of expenses of....