Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Delhi ProcessCumProduct Development ... vs Addl. Cit, Meerut on 4 February, 2019 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCHES (CAMP AT MEERUT) BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.3401/Del./2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 201011) ITA No.3402/Del./2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 201112) ITA No.3403/Del./2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 201314) ProcesscumProduct Development Centre, vs. Addl. CIT, Sport Goods Complex, Circle 2, Delhi Road, Meerut. Meerut. (PAN : AAAJP1090M) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri K.K. Garg, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri S.S. Rana, CIT DR Shri Munshi Ram Bihagra, Senior DR Date of Hearing : 09.01.2019 Date of Order : 04.02.2019 ORDER PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : Since common questions of facts and law have been raised in the aforesaid appeals, the same are being disposed off by way of consolidated order to avoid repetition of discussion. 2 ITA No.3401, 3402 & 3403/Del./2017 2. The appellant, ProcesscumProduct Development Centre (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee') by filing the present appeals, sought to set aside the impugned order all dated 06.03.2017 passed by the ld. CIT (Appeals), Aligarh qua the assessment years 201011, 201112 & 201314 on the identical grounds inter alia that : "1. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax( Appeals) erred in observing that the appellant educational institution is not existing solely for educational purposes and thus, dismissing the claim of exemption U/S 10(23C)(iiiab) of the IncomeTax Act. The observation is unwarranted and against facts of the case. 2. That the appellant institution is solely engaged in imparting education and in the same process train students by sending them to sports industries etc. That the Ld Commissioner of IncomeTax(Appeals) is admitted this facts, that the society is engaged in education/training given to the young in preparation of work in life and its activities were without any profit motive. After that Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals is not justified to allow the claim of the assessee U/S 10(23C)(iiiab) of the IncomeTax Act, 1961. 3. That the Ld Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is arbitrary and unjust, for not considering this facts, that the society is substantially financed b the Government and functioning under the administrative control of Micro Small and Medium Enterprises(MSME), Government of India. 4. That the appellant has claimed exemption of its income U/S 1O(23C)(iiiab) irrespective of provisions contained in Section 12AA of the IncomeTax Act, the rejection of the same is bed in law." 3 ITA No.3401, 3402 & 3403/Del./2017 3. Briefly stated the identical facts necessary for adjudication of all the aforesaid three appeals of assessee pertaining to Assessment Years 201011, 201112 & 201314 are : Assessee society is engaged in conducting various short duration training programs of computer training, Doner, CAD/CAM/D.L.G. Tech, DST, Mech. Web Designing, audit CAD, Linus & C++, training in Computer Accounting System (TCAS), Tally 9, Leg guards & Gloves (STST) Hand Gloves Manufacturing, Shuttle Cock Manufacturing, cricket bat manufacturing, carom board manufacturing, Leg guard manufacturing, batting gloves manufacturing, football manufacturing, Cricket ball manufacturing (Jalandhar) and leather workshop, training in R/P workshop, wood work shop etc.. Assessee society claimed exemption under section 10(23C)(iiib) of the Incometax Act, 1961 (for short 'the act'). Declining the explanation furnished by the assessee society to prove its eligibility for claiming exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiab), Assessing Officer proceeded to disallow the exemption on the ground that the assessee society is not running an institution to provide systematic education by relying upon the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case cited as Solo Trustee Loka Shikshak Trust vs. CIT 101 ITR 234 and thereby assessed the net taxable income at Rs.56,48,582/, () 4 ITA No.3401, 3402 & 3403/Del./2017 Rs.18,23,401/ and () Rs.5,48,829/ for AYs 201011, 201112 and 201314 respectively. 4. Assessee carried the matter by w