FORTIS HEALTHCARE LTD PROVIDENT FUND TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT,CIRCLE7 (1) C.R.BUILDING I.P.ESTATE, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2425/DEL/2022Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 January 2023AY 2018-194 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) failed to decide the grounds raised by the assessee and passed an irrelevant order. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was against the denial of exemption under Section 10(25)(ii) of the Income Tax Act for AY 2018-19. However, the CIT(A) passed an order that did not address the grounds raised by the assessee, instead dealing with an irrelevant issue.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly adjudicated the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, specifically concerning the denial of exemption under Section 10(25)(ii).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10(25)(ii),Section 143(1),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD

Hearing: 01.11.2022

आदेश /O R D E R This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld.

1.

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dated 20.10.2021 for the AY 2018-19. The assessee has raised the following grounds in its appeal: - 1. “That the order dated 20.10.2021 passed u/s 250 of the I.T. Act, 1961 by Ld. CIT(A) – NFAC is bad in law and not relevant to the intimation order appealed against dated 31.05.2019 passed u/s 143(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 is wrong on facts and is liable to be dismissed.

2. That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, Ld. CIT(A) – NFAC has grossly erred in the impugned order by not dealing at all with the grounds raised by the appellant.

3. That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in recording wrong facts, not relating to the appellant, in the impugned order.

I.T.A.No.2425/Del/2022

4. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or vary any of the above grounds either before or at the time of hearing as may be advised.” 2. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that the Ld.CIT(A) has not dealt with the issue which was in appeal before him and he has passed a totality irrelevant order and not dealing with the grounds before him. Ld. Counsel submits that the CPC while processing the return u/s 143(1) of the Act did not allow exemption u/s 10(25)(ii) of the Act for the AY 2018-19 though the assessing is entitled for such exemption. The Ld. Counsel further submits that the assessee society is registered u/s 12A and its income is exempt u/s 10(25)(ii) of the Act.

The Ld. Counsel submits that the Assessing Officer in fact allowed such exemption for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16 while completing the assessments u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 10.06.2016 and 08.11.2017 respectively. The Ld. Counsel also submits that for the assessment years 2017-18, 2019-20 and 2020-21 even the CPC while processing the return u/s 143(1) of the Act allowed the exemption u/s 10(25)(ii) of the Act to the assessee. However, only for the AY 2018-19 the CPC in the return processed u/s 143(1) did not allow exemption u/s 10(25)(ii) and the reason is not known. The Ld. CIT(Appeals) did not deal with the ground raised by the assessee before him in not allowing exemption u/s 10(25)(ii) of the Act but decided an issue which is totally relevant and not arising out of the intimation passed nor the grounds raised by the assessee before him. 2

I.T.A.No.2425/Del/2022

3.

On hearing both the parties and perusing the orders of the authorities below, we find that the Ld. CIT(Appeals) in his order dated 20.10.2021 extracted the grounds said to have been raised by the assessee. He has also extracted the submissions said to have been submitted by the assessee which are relevant for the dispute regarding addition made on account of salary. However, Form 35 and the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee trust before the CIT-National Faceless (Appeal) Centre was against non granting of exemption u/s 10(25)(ii) of the Act to the assessee. None of the grounds raised by the assessee were decided by the Ld. CIT(A) presumably inadvertently. Therefore, taking the totality of facts and circumstances into consideration in the interest of justice, this appeal is restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the grounds raised by the assessee in the appeal filed before the Ld. CIT(A) afresh and in accordance with law. The assessee be given adequate opportunity of being heard.

4.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →