The Commissioner of Income-tax Central, Patna / Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-4, Patna v. Takshila Education Society
[Citation -2019-LL-0214-39]
| Citation | 2019-LL-0214-39 |
|---|---|
| Appellant Name | The Commissioner of Income-tax Central, Patna / Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-4, Patna |
| Respondent Name | Takshila Education Society |
| Court | HIGH COURT OF PATNA |
| Relevant Act | Income-tax |
| Date of Order | 14/02/2019 |
| Assessment Year | 2001-02 |
| Judgment | View Judgment |
| Keyword Tags | substantial question of law • educational society • legal position |
| Bot Summary: | CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 14-02-2019 Leave is granted to Ms. Archana Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-department to correct the provisions as occurring in paragraph of the substantial questions of law to read section 10(23C)(vi) in place of 10(23)(vi) during course of the day. We have heard Ms. Archana Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department and Mr. Ajay Kumar Rastogi, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-assessee and we have perused the records. The assessee is an educational society and apparently enjoying the exemption granted by the statutory authority under section 10(23C)(vi) as well as the exemption under section 11 of the Act for which it is duly registered under section 12AA of the Act. In so far as the present appeal is concerned, it is the exemption granted to the society under section 10(23C) of the Act which is the subject matter of dispute and to cut short the matter it is because the Commissioner, Income Tax has accepted the position to differ with the opinion of the Assessing Authority and which opinion of the Commissioner, Income Tax has been endorsed by the Tribunal by the order impugned that feeling aggrieved Department is before us. Ms. Archana Sinha, learned counsel Patna High Court MA No.531 of 2008 dt.14-02-2019 3/4 appearing for the appellant-department has chosen to raise the issue present at paragraph of the substantial question of law to submit that the assessee is not entitled to exemption under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act , because it does not exist solely for educational purposes. The arguments are contested by Mr. Ajay Kumar Rastogi, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-assessee in reference to the order of the Central Board of Direct Taxes enclosed at Annexure R/1 series to submit that the appellants cannot be permitted to raise this issue in view of the exemption granted by the Central Board of Direct Taxes through the order dated 02.03.2002 which was valid for the period 1999-2000, 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 including the assessment year in question which is a subject matter of the present appeal i.e. assessment year 2001-2002. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and we have perused the records and in our opinion apart from the fact that the issue raised by the department has not only been Patna High Court MA No.531 of 2008 dt.14-02-2019 4/4 negated by the Commissioner of Income Tax but has also been confirmed by the Tribunal as well, in view of the exemption granted by the Central Board of Direct Taxes on 02.03.2002 which remains uncontested, we do not see any reason for the department to prefer this appeal which issue stands answered by the exemption order of the Central Board of Direct Taxes dated 02.03.2002. |