SWAMI SIVANANDA VIDYA MANDIR TRUST,CUTTACK vs. ADIT, CPC, BENGALUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 90/CTK/2023Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack21 July 2023AY 2020-214 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the extension of limitation by the Supreme Court was for proceedings before courts/tribunals and not for filing returns or audit reports. The CBDT circular also did not permit filing Form 10B beyond the extended due date for the return.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a charitable trust, filed its return of income and the audit report in Form 10B after the due date. The Assessing Officer disallowed the expenditure claimed, citing the late filing of the audit report. The CIT(A) upheld this decision.

What were the issues?

Whether the late filing of the audit report in Form 10B, along with the return of income, affects the eligibility for deductions under Sections 11 and 12A of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 139(1),Section 11,Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,

Before: GIRISH AGRAWALWAL

For Appellant: Shri Braja Kishore Mohapatra, Shri Braja Kishore Mohapatra, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Mahapatra, Shri Saroj Kumar Mahapatra, Pr. CIT DR
Hearing: 21/07Pronounced: 21/0

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK , CUTTACK BEFORE BEFORE S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL JUDICIAL MEMBER AND GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER WAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2020-2021 2021 Swami Swami Sivananda Sivananda Bidya Bidya Vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengalur ADIT, CPC, Bengalur Mandir Trust, Pithapur Road, Mandir Trust, Pithapur Road, Cuttack PAN/GIR No. PAN/GIR No.AALTS 0050 R (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Braja Kishore Mohapatra : Shri Braja Kishore Mohapatra, Adv Revenue by Revenue by : Shri Saroj Kumar Mahapatra, : Shri Saroj Kumar Mahapatra, Pr. CIT DR Date of Hearing : 21/07 7/2023 Date of Pronouncement : 21/0 /07/2023 O R D E R Per Bench

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A) NFAC, Delhi NFAC, Delhi dated 6.2.2023 in Appeal No.ITBA ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 23/109468599(1) 23/109468599(1) for the assessment year 2020-2021. 2021.

2.

Shri Braja Kishore Mohapatra, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Braja Kishore Mohapatra, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Braja Kishore Mohapatra, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Saroj Kumar Mohapatra, ld. Pr. CIT, DR appeared for the revenue. Shri Saroj Kumar Mohapatra, ld. Pr. CIT, DR appeared for the revenue. Shri Saroj Kumar Mohapatra, ld. Pr. CIT, DR appeared for the revenue.

3.

It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee is a charitable trust. It is a charitable trust. It was the submission that the return filed by the assessee came to be was the submission that the return filed by the assessee came to be was the submission that the return filed by the assessee came to be processed and intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act came to be issued, wherein, processed and intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act came to be issued, wherein, processed and intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act came to be issued, wherein,

P a g e 1 | 4 the expenditure as claimed by the assessee came to be disallowed. It was the submission that the reason given was that the assessee had not submitted the audit report in Form 10-B within the time. It was the submission that on appeal, the ld CIT(A) had also confirmed the intimation. It was the submission that the due date for filing of the return for the relevant assessment year was 15.2.2021 and the due date for filing of Form 10B was 15.2.2021. It was the submission that the return of income had been filed by the assessee on 27.3.2021 and the Form 10B was filed alongwith the return of income on 27.3.2021. It was the submission that the Hon’ble Supreme had extended the period of limitation to 2.10.2021 and consequently, the assessee is liable to be granted the benefit of deduction u/s.12A and Section 11 of the Act. Ld AR has drawn our attention to the Misc. application No.,21 of 2022 in Suo moto writ petition (C) No.3/2020 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 10.1.2022 to submit that the Hon’ble Supreme Court had extended the period of limitation in respect of all proceedings before the Courts/Tribunals.

4.

In reply, ld Pr. CIT DR submitted that the extention of the period of limitation by the Hon’ble Supreme Court was in regard to proceedings before the Courts/Tribunals. It was the submission that the CBDT vide its circular No.6 dated 24.5.2023 has categorically extended the limitation to 15.2.2021 in respect of filing of the return. It was further submitted that the assessee could have filed Form 10B within the extended period of P a g e 2 | 4 limitation on 15.2.2021. It was the submission that the assessee has not filed the return nor Form 10B within the extention period granted, therefore, the return filed by the assessee on 27.3.2021 was not return u/s.139(1) of the Act. It was the submission that as the Form 10B has not been filed within the extended period, the intimation issued is liable to be upheld.

6.

We have considered the rival submissions. It is noticed that CBDT vide its circular No.6 dated 24.5.2023 has categorically extended the period of limitation to 15.2.2021 as also permitted by interpretation to file the audit report in Form 10B within the due date of filing of return u/s.139(1) of the Act. In the present case, it is noticed that the assessee has filed the return only on 27.3.2021 alongwith Form 10B. Admittedly, the return of income filed by the assesse alongwith Form 10B is beyond the due date of filing of return u/s.139(1) of the Act. This being so, we are of the view that the intimation passed u/s.143(1) and the order of the Ld CIT(A) does not call for any interference.

7.

Coming to the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Misc. Application No.21 of 2022, admittedly, same is in relation to the extention of period of limitation of all proceedings before the Courts/Tribunals, hence, same would not apply to extention of period of limitation in respect of filing of the return of income nor does it apply in respect of Form 10B being the audit report. P a g e 3 | 4

8.

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands dismissed.

Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 21/07/2023.

Sd/- sd/- (Girish Agrawal) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 21/07/2023 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Swami Sivananda Bidya Mandir Trust, Pithapur Road, Cuttack 2. The Respondent: ADIT, CPC, Bengalur 3. The CIT(A)-, NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr.CIT-, 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy//

More judgments on Section 139(1)

All 8,117 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →