- (1.) The delay in refiling the appeal is condoned.
(2.) This appeal has been preferred by the appellant-assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, "the Act") against the order dated 30.6.2009, Annexure A.1 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench (in short, "the Tribunal") in ITA No.223 (ASR)/2009 for the assessment year 2004-05, claiming following substantial question of law:- "Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Income Tax (Appellate) Tribunal was correct in law in denying the exemption under section 11 of the Act on capital expenditure incurred by the assessee on objects of general public utility contrary to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in S.RM.M.CT.M Teruppani Trust vs. CIT, 1998 230 ITR 636 -
(3.) A few facts relevant for the decision of the controversy involved as narrated in the appeal may be noticed.The appellant-assessee was registered under section 12AA of the Act vide order passed by the Tribunal on 15.6.2007 in ITA Nos.184 and 195 ASR 2006. The said order was upheld by this court on 31.10.2008, Annexure A.2.The assessee was thus held to be a charitable institution carrying on activities of general public utility within the meaning of Section 2(15) of the Act. The assessee filed return for the assessment year 2004-05. The Assessing Officer while framing assessment disallowed the expenditure against works amounting to Rs. 8,76,538/- and town development expenses at Rs. 3,79,192/- being capital in nature. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee filed appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. Vide order dated 13.2.2009, Annexure A.4, the CIT(A) upheld the order passed by the Assessing Officer and denied the exemption under section 11 of the Act to the assessee only on the ground that the expenditure being incurred by the assessee on its objects was capital in nature. Not satisfied with the order, the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal contending that the expenditure incurred by it on account of payment against works amounting to Rs. 8,76,538/- and town development expenses at Rs. 3,79,192/- was in consonance with its objects of general public utility and no distinction had been made under the Act holding that application of income must be only towards revenue expenditure in order to avail exemption under section 11 of the Act. The Tribunal held that the judgment of the Apex Court in S.RM.M.CT.M Teruppani Trust's case , was not applicable as the assessee had not brought out any material to suggest that the said amounts were spent for charitable purpose. The Tribunal declined the exemption under Section 11 of the Act only on the ground that the expenditure being capital in nature, the assessee was not entitled to exemption. Hence the instant appeal by the appellant-assessee.;