Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK ‘SMC’ BENCH, CUTTACK , CUTTACK BEFORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2016-17 Public Public School, School, Narayani Vs. ITO ITO (Exemption), (Exemption), Road, Phulbani, Kandhamala Road, Phulbani, Kandhamala Berhampur, Odissa Berhampur, Odissa PAN/GIR No. PAN/GIR No.AACAP 2422 Q (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee by : Shri A.K.Padhy, CA hy, CA Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR Date of Hearing : 19 /0 04/2023 Date of Pronouncement : 19/0 /04/2023 O R D E R
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, NFAC, Delhi Delhi dated 26.12.2022 26.12.2022 in Appeal No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022-23/1048231407(1) for the assessment year for the assessment year 2016-17 confirming the 17 confirming the adjustment made in the intimation issued adjustment made in the intimation issued u/s.143(1) of the Act dated 29.3.2018. u/s.143(1) of the Act dated 29.3.2018.
Shri A.K.Pa Shri A.K.Padhy, CA appeared for the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, hy, CA appeared for the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue. ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue.
It was submitted by ld AR that subsequent to intimation issued It was submitted by ld AR that subsequent to intimation issued It was submitted by ld AR that subsequent to intimation issued u/s.143(1) of the Act, scrutiny assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act has been 43(1) of the Act, scrutiny assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act has been 43(1) of the Act, scrutiny assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act has been P a g e 1 | 3 completed on 2.11.2018, wherein, the returned income has been accepted and the income of the assessee has been determined at Nil after granting the assessee benefit of deduction u/s.10(23C) of the Act and after considering the registration u/s.12AA of the Act. It was the submission that as the scrutiny assessment has been completed and all details have been examined and accepted, the adjustment as made in the intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act could not be considered as a prima facie adjustment. It was the submission that in the intimation u/s.143(1), the entire expenses incurred by the assessee has been disallowed.
In reply, ld Sr DR vehemently supported the order of the ld CIT(A). it was the submission that in the intimation u/s.143(1), the specified adjustment had been done.
I have considered the rival submissions. It is an admitted fact that after the intimation u/s.143(1) issued to the assessee, assessment for the impugned assessment year has been completed u/s.143(3) of the Act and after examination of all the issues, the assessee has been held to be eligible for deduction u/s.10(23C) and 12AA of the Act. Thus, clearly, the adjustment as made by the CPC in the intimation u/s.143(1) is nothing but a debatable issue, which could not have been considered as a mistake apparent from the record. This being so, it is held that intimation u/s.143(1) is unsustainable and consequently, same stands set aside.
P a g e 2 | 3
In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed.
Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 19/04/2023.