AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. - (1.) THIS order shall dispose of ITA Nos.870 and 871 of 2010 as learned counsel for the parties are agreed that identical questions of law and facts are involved in both the appeals. However, the facts are being extracted from ITA No.870 of 2010, which may be briefly noticed.
(2.) ITA No.870 of 2010 has been preferred by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, "the Act") against the order dated 29.1.2010, Annexure A.3 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench 'A', Chandigarh (for brevity, "the Tribunal") in ITA No.914/Chd/2009 for the assessment year 2004 -05, claiming following substantial questions of law: - i) Whetherin the facts and the circumstances of the case, the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has not committed an error of law in not adjudicating upon the ground in respect of action of Assessing Officer in extending the scope of the order of learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 18.12.2007? ii) Whether in the facts and the circumstances of the case, learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding that assessee was not entitled for exemption under section 11(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, when Form No.10 was duly filed before Assessing Officer during the course of the assessment proceedings and the requirements of provisions of section 11(2) stood complied? iii) Whether in the facts and the circumstances of the case, learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding that assessee was not entitled for exemption under Section 11(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, when Form No.10 was duly filed before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Panchkula and the compliance with provisions of section 11(2) stood made? The appellant is a charitable institution registered underSection 12A of the Act and hence is eligible for exemption of its income as per provision of Sections 11 and 12 of the Act. During the course of assessment proceedings under section 143 (3) of the Act, it was submitted before the Assessing officer that the scope of proceedings before the Assessing officer was limited to the extent of examining whether 85% of the amount of interest was utilized for the purpose of Institution or not. Vide order dated 26.12.2008, Annexure A.1, the Assessing officer extended the scope of reassessment proceedings and assessed the income at Rs.1,22,22,280/ - by making certain additions and by denying the exemption claimed for accumulation of unspent amount on the ground of non filing of Form No.10 under the provisions of Section 11(2) of the Act. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee went in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. Vide order dated 8.6.2009, Annexure A.2, the CIT(A) while allowing the appeal partly upheld the order of Assessing Officer and denied the exemption claimed on the ground of non filing of Form No.10 for accumulation of unspent sums under Section 11(2) of the Act. Still not satisfied with the order, the assessee went in appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal vide order dated 20.1.2010, Annexure A.3 upheld the order of CIT(A). Hence the present appeals by the assessee.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee had filed Form No.10 for accumulation of profits in terms of Rule 17 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (in short, "the Rules") and the Tribunal had erred in declining the benefit under Section 11 of the Act.;