CIT v. Orissa Cricket Association

Case Laws Analysis
REFERRED Ananda Social & Educational Trust v. CIT 2020 TaxPub(DT) 1340 (SC)
REFERRED Orissa Cricket Association Barabati Stadium v. CIT (Exemptions) & Anr. 2018 TaxPub(DT) 0337 (Ctk-Trib)
REFERRED Tamil Nadu Cricket Association v. DIT (Exemptions) 2014 TaxPub(DT) 0542 (Mad-HC)
REFERRED Director of IT v. Foundation of Ophthalmic & Optometry Research Education Centre 2012 TaxPub(DT) 3100 (Del-HC)
REFERRED Additional CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association 1980 TaxPub(DT) 0848 (SC)

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT


The Tax Publishers2024 TaxPub(DT) 1521 (Ori-HC) IN THE ORISSA HIGH COURT ARINDAM SINHA & SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA JJ. CIT (Exemptions) v. Orissa Cricket Association I. T. A. No. 55 of 2018 13 July, 2023 Appellant by: R. Chimanka, Senior Standing Counsel, Respondent by: S. Ray, Senior Advocate, JUDGMENT Arindam Sinha J. The appellant-Revenue has preferred appeal against the common order dated 26-12-2017 made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Cuttack Bench in I. T. A. No. 335/CTK/2017, pertaining to assessment year 1997-98 and I. T. A. No. 210/CTK/2016 Orissa Cricket Association v. CIT (Exemptions) (2018) 61 ITR (Trib) 675 (Cuttack) : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 0337 (Ctk-Trib), pertaining to the assessment year 2011-12. This appeal impugns the former. 2. The appeal was admitted on the substantial question of law, repro duced below : 'Where an assessee seeking registration under section 12AA in course of conducting its activities under the objects has suffered survey and, search and seizure of its honorary secretary and there has been violation of provisions in section 13(1)(c), can the facts be considered for the purpose of satisfaction on the application for grant of registration ?' 3. Mr. Chimanka, the learned advocate, senior standing counsel appears on behalf of appellant-Revenue. He submits, the Commissioner of Income-tax (CIT) (Exemptions) correctly appreciated the position emerging on earlier application of the assessee, rejected by order dated 26-5-2017. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) refused to grant registration mainly on the ground that the funds of the assessee were diverted for personal benefits of the executives of the society, in violation of the provisions of section 13(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Further more, receipts from the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) were shown as corpus fund instead of treating them as revenue receipts. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) had relied on the survey operation under section 133A, conducted in the premises of the assessee-association along with search and seizure operation under section 132 in the residential premises of the honorary secretary. Incriminating documents, books of account were found and impounded and demand was raised for block period from the assessment year 2000-01, as confirmed by the first appellate authority. In the circumstances, rejection of the application was duly made. The Tribunal, setting aside the same by the impugned order, gave rise to the substantial question of law, to be answered in favour of the Revenue. 4. Mr. Ray, the learned senior advocate appears on behalf of the respondent-assessee. He submits, his client has got provisional registration under section 12A for the assessment years 2022-23 to 2026-27. He hands up the order of provisional registration dated 28-4-2021 along with the order dated 2-8-2022 made by the co-ordinate Bench. Text of the said order dated 2-8-2022 is reproduced below : '1. Mr. Sidhartha Ray, the learned counsel for the respondent has handed over a copy of the order for provisional registration in form-10AC granting registration to the respondent under section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the assessment years (assessment years) 2022-23 to 2026-27. SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax Publishers2024 TaxPub(DT) 1521 (Ori-HC)

IN THE ORISSA HIGH COURT

ARINDAM SINHA & SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA JJ.

CIT (Exemptions) v. Orissa Cricket Association

I. T. A. No. 55 of 2018

13 July, 2023

Appellant by: R. Chimanka, Senior Standing Counsel,

Respondent by: S. Ray, Senior Advocate,

JUDGMENT

Arindam Sinha J.

The appellant-Revenue has preferred appeal against the common order dated 26-12-2017 made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Cuttack Bench in I. T. A. No. 335/CTK/2017, pertaining to assessment year 1997-98 and I. T. A. No. 210/CTK/2016 Orissa Cricket Association v. CIT (Exemptions) (2018) 61 ITR (Trib) 675 (Cuttack) : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 0337 (Ctk-Trib), pertaining to the assessment year 2011-12. This appeal impugns the former.

2. The appeal was admitted on the substantial question of law, repro duced below :

'Where an assessee seeking registration under section 12AA in course of conducting its activities under the objects has suffered survey and, search and seizure of its honorary secretary and there has been violation of provisions in section 13(1)(c), can the facts be considered for the purpose of satisfaction on the application for grant of registration ?'

3. Mr. Chimanka, the learned advocate, senior standing counsel appears on behalf of appellant-Revenue. He submits, the Commissioner of Income-tax (CIT) (Exemptions) correctly appreciated the position emerging on earlier application of the assessee, rejected by order dated 26-5-2017. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) refused to grant registration mainly on the ground that the funds of the assessee were diverted for personal benefits of the executives of the society, in violation of the provisions of section 13(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Further more, receipts from the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) were shown as corpus fund instead of treating them as revenue receipts. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) had relied on the survey operation under section 133A, conducted in the premises of the assessee-association along with search and seizure operation under section 132 in the residential premises of the honorary secretary. Incriminating documents, books of account were found and impounded and demand was raised for block period from the assessment year 2000-01, as confirmed by the first appellate authority. In the circumstances, rejection of the application was duly made. The Tribunal, setting aside the same by the impugned order, gave rise to the substantial question of law, to be answered in favour of the Revenue.

4. Mr. Ray, the learned senior advocate appears on behalf of the respondent-assessee. He submits, his client has got provisional registration under section 12A for the assessment years 2022-23 to 2026-27. He hands up the order of provisional registration dated 28-4-2021 along with the order dated 2-8-2022 made by the co-ordinate Bench. Text of the said order dated 2-8-2022 is reproduced below :

'1. Mr. Sidhartha Ray, the learned counsel for the respondent has handed over a copy of the order for provisional registration in form-10AC granting registration to the respondent under section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the assessment years (assessment years) 2022-23 to 2026-27.