IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH B NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA : ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE : JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no. 6057/Del/2013 U/s 2006-07 Income Tax Officer (E) Vs. Centre for Development of Telematics, Trust Ward-III, C-DOT Campus, Mehrauli, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN: AAATC 3895 K (Appellant) ( Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Anil Kumar Saroha Sr. DR Respondent : Shri Ajay Vohra Sr. Adv. & Shri Aditya Vohra Adv. Date of hearing : 14/09/2016. Date of order : 19/09/2016. ORDER PER S.V. MEHROTRA, A.M: This is departments appeal against order dated 22.08.2013 passed by ld. CIT(Appeals)-XXI, New Delhi in appeal no. 01/2011-12/337 relating to AY 2006-07. 2. At outset ld. counsel for assessee pointed out that department s appeal has become infructuous and deserves to be dismissed. He pointed out that in this case assessee had claimed exemption u/s 10(21). However, AO vide his order dated 31.12.2008 denied same observing that since CBDT vide 2 notification no. 148/2007 dated 12.4.2007 had notified assessee to be in category of other institutions partly engaged in research activities u/s 35(1)(ii) of Act, assessee was not eligible for benefit u/s 10(21). 3. Ld. counsel pointed out that CIT(A) vide his order dated 28.1.2011 upheld finding of AO categorizing it under other institutions partly engaged in research activities and, therefore, not eligible for benefit u/s 10(21). He pointed out that AO passed consequential order on 17.3.2011 giving effect to directions contained in CIT(A) s order dated 28.1.2011. Ld. counsel further submitted that on 19.3.2013 Hon ble Delhi High Court passed order setting aside CBDT Notification no. 148/2007 and directed Central Government to decide issue whether assessee was scientific research association or other institutions partly doing scientific research within three months from date of order. He further pointed out that on 13.8.2013 CBDT vide Notification no. 62 of 2013 notified assessee to be covered in category of scientific research association with retrospective effect from 1.4.2002 onwards for purpose of section 35(1)(ii) of Act. 4. Ld. counsel pointed out that ITAT vide its order dated 27.6.2014 in appeal against CIT(A) s order dated 28.1.2011 set aside order of CIT(A) and AO and restored issue afresh to AO with direction to pass speaking order in accordance with law after noting as under: 3 - Impugned assessment order (L" round) was passed in reference to CBDT Notification No. 148/2007 dated 12.04.2007 - Aforesaid Notification was subsequently set aside by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi vide judgment rendered on 19.03.2013 - CBDT issued fresh Notification No.62 of2013 dated 13.08.2013 notifying assessee to be covered in category of "scientific research association", with retrospective effect from 0 1.04.2002 onwards, for purpose of section 35(l)(ii) of Act - Exemption under section 10(21) has been granted to assessee by assessing officer itself in assessment order passed for assessment year 2011-12. 5. Ld. counsel pointed out that in backdrop of these proceedings, ld. CIT(A) s order dated 22.8.2013 allowing assessee s appeal against appeal effect order dated 17.3.2011 passed by AO u/s 143(3) read with section 250 of Act on ground that CBDT vide notification no. 62 of 2013 dated 13.8.2013 notified assessee as scientific research association and assessee was, therefore, entitled to claim of exemption u/s 10(21) of Act, does not survive in view of Tribunal s order. He, therefore, submitted that present appeal filed by revenue, in any view of matter, has become infructuous. 6. Ld. DR did not dispute all facts mentioned by ld. counsel for assessee. 4 7. We have considered submissions of both parties and find that denial for exemption u/s 10(21) was made because CBDT had notified vide Notification no. 148 of 2007 dated 12.4.2007 to assessee as in category of other institutions partly engaged in research activities . However, after decision of Hon ble High Court vide notification no. 62 of 2013 dated 13.8.2013 issued by CBDT, assessee has been categorized as Scientific research Association with retrospective effect from 1.4.2002.Further, we note that vide order dated 27.6.2014 Tribunal has set aside ld. CIT(A) s order in first round of proceedings and, therefore, present impugned order of ld. CIT(A) in second round of proceedings does not survive and, therefore, department s appeal is dismissed as infructuous. 8. In result, revenue s appeal is dismissed. Order pronouncement in open court on 19/09/2016. Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (S.V. MEHROTRA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 19/09/2016. MP Copy of order to: 1. Assessee 2. AO 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, New Delhi. Income-tax Officer (E), Trust Ward-III, New Delhi v. Centre for Development of Telematic