आदेश/ORDER

Per Dr. A.L. Saini, AM:

The captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year 2009-10, is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-25, Kolkata, in appeal no. 122/CIT(A)-25/Kol/2015-16, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the “Act”) dated 31.03.2015.

2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee reads as follows:

1. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [here-in-after referred to as CIT(A)] has erred in law and facts in confirming the reopening of the assessment for the assessment year 2009-10.

2. That the learned CIT (A) has erred in holding that the claim of the assessee for exemption under the provisions of section 11 of the Act is not tenable and allowable under the provisions of the Act.

3. That the learned CIT (A) should have passed a speaking order in relation to the appellant's submission that the appeal filed on 23 April 2015 against the order dated 31 March 2015 passed under the provisions of section 144 of the Act should be merged with the Appeal No. ITA No.122/CIT(A)- 25/Kol./2015-16.

4. That the CIT (A) has failed to realise that the appellant has been granted registration under section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 03.05.2013 whereas the notice for reopening the assessment was issued on 27.03.2014 and as such the reopening is barred by limitation as per the amended provision of section 12A of the said Act.

5. That, Without prejudice to Ground Nos. 1, 2 and 3, the CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in not allowing Rs.2,35,00,000/- being the compensation paid to the encroachers to the Land of WBTPO during the year ended 31^st March, 2009.

6. That the CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming the disallowance of the amortisation of the lease rent paid in advance spreading over the period of five years.

7. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, amplify or modify any or all of the above grounds of appeal on or before the time of hearing of appeal.

3. When this appeal was called out for hearing, the ld. Counsel for the assessee invited our attention to the order dated 05.07.2018, passed by the Tribunal in assessee’s owncasein I.T.A. No. 156/Kol/2017, for assessment year 2011-12. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the present issue is squarely covered by the above said order of the Tribunal, a copy of which is also placed before the Bench.

4. The ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below.

5. We see no reason to take any other view of the matter then the view so taken by the division bench of this Tribunal in assessee’s own case vide order dated 05.07.2018. In this order, the Tribunal has inter alia observed as under:

“3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company is a consortium of the Central Government [Ministry of Commerce & Industry - through the Indian Trade Promotion Organisation], the State Government [through the West Bengal Industrial Development Corporation, Department of Commerce & Industries], and the Kolkata Municipal Corporation - the objects being to foster the promotion of trade and 'Commerce. For implementation purpose - it is incorporated as a company under section 25 of the Companies Act, 1956, i.e., the objects of the company are to promote the objects of the nature specified in the Section 25 sub-section (1), clause (a) of the said Act, and that it will apply its profits, if any, or other income in promoting its objects and to prohibit the payment of any dividend to its members. In the assessment, the AO assessed the assessee as a company under Chapter IV of the Act - i.e., as a company with profit motive/business income. Though not mentioned in the assessment order, it is obvious that this was because of absence of registration u/s 12AA [for this AY 2011-12]. Thus, while being assessed vis-à-vis computation under chapter IV, some disallowances were