Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES “A”, JAIPUR
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 851/JP/2019
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “A”, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 851/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2010-11 All Rajasthan State Bank of cuke I.T.O. (Exemptions) Bikaner & Jaipur Employees Vs. Ward-1, Jaipur. Association, 1, SMS Highway Branch, Choura Rasta, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABAA 8449 F vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by: Smt. Neelam Bhala (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Mrs. Chanchal Meena (Addl.CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 04/06/2020 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 04/06/2020 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 12/04/2019 of ld. CIT(A)-3, Jaipur for the A.Y. 2010-11. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income tax appeals has not justified to appellant by confirm the additions made by the Ld AO by treating Exempt Interest and Rental income under section 10(24) of I Tax Act 1961 for Rs. 1043749.00 as Taxable income of the assessee without providing the sufficient opportunity of being heard, without providing the copy of recorded reason for issuing the notice under section 148, only on the basis that the assessee
2 ITA 851/JP/2019_ All Rajasthan SBBJ Employees Association Vs ITO(E) has not file any evidence in respect to Exempt Income are not according to the law and facts of the case. The appellant prays your honours indulgence to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of appeal on or before the date of hearing. 2. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income tax appeals has not justified to appellant by passing the order under section 144/147 of the I tax Act and without providing the opportunity of being heard are not according to the law and facts of the case. 3. The Ld AO (ITO (Exemptions) Ward 1 Jaipur) had seriously erred in passing the order while notice under section 148 issued by the ITO Ward 4(1) Jaipur which are not according to the law and facts of the case. 4. The Ld AO had seriously erred by not giving the TDS Credit for Rs 53979.00. are not according to the law and facts of the case. 5. The appellant prays your honours indulgence to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of appeal on or before the date of hearing. 2. The hearing of the appeal was concluded through video conference in view of the prevailing situation of Covid-19 Pandemic. The assessee stated to be a registered Trade Union being the employees’ association of erstwhile State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur (SBBJ) now merged with the State Bank of India. The assessee did not file any return of income U/s 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act). Subsequently, the A.O. issued notice U/s 148 of the Act on 29/03/2017 on the basis of the AIR information regarding the interest income from SBBJ. Initially, there was no response from the assessee to the notice issued U/s 148 of the Act as well as notice U/s 142(1) of the
3 ITA 851/JP/2019_ All Rajasthan SBBJ Employees Association Vs ITO(E) Act. However, finally, the assessee filed its return of income on 04/10/2017 declaring NIL income after claiming exemption U/s 10(24) of the Act. The A.O. framed the assessment U/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act by treating the return of income filed by the assessee as not valid and consequently, the A.O. has assessed total income at Rs. 10,43,749/- which was shown by the assessee in its return of income. The A.O. has denied the claim of exemption U/s 10(24) of the Act for want of any evidence in support of the said claim.
The assessee challenged the action of the A.O. before the ld. CIT(A) but again there is no representative on behalf of the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) and consequently, the appeal of the assessee was dismissed ex parte while passing the impugned order.
Before the Tribunal, the ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that despite specific requests by the assessee, the A.O. has not supplied the reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment, therefore, the reassessment proceedings completed by the A.O. are vitiated when the A.O. has not supplied the reasons to the assessee. The ld AR has further contended that the assessee is a registered Trade Union and therefore, the assessee is eligible for exemption U/s 10(24) of the Act in respect of the income from house property and income from other sources. The ld
4 ITA 851/JP/2019_ All Rajasthan SBBJ Employees Association Vs ITO(E) AR has submitted that the A.O. has not disputed the source of income which was assessed to tax as income from house property and income from other sources. Thus, the ld AR has contended that the assessee is a registered Trade Union and the income from interest from the bank as well as income from rent which is assessable as income from house property are eligible for exemption U/s 10(24) of the Act. The ld AR has pointed out that as per the directions of the Tribunal, the assessee has filed all the relevant records in support of the claim of exemption U/s 10(24) of the Act including the situation of the assessee and registration of the Trade Union as well as certificate issued by the A.O. U/s 197(1) of the Act regarding deduction of TDS at zero percent (0%), thus, the department has accepted that the assessee is eligible for exemption U/s 10(24) of the Act while issuing the certificate U/s 197(1) of the Act. Hence, the ld. AR has pleaded that the addition made by the A.O. and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) shall be deleted.
On the other hand, the ld DR has submitted that there was no return of income U/s 139 of the Act filed by the assessee and even there is no valid return in response to the notice U/s 148 of the Act. Therefore, the A.O. is no obliged to furnish the reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment. The ld DR has further contended that the
5 ITA 851/JP/2019_ All Rajasthan SBBJ Employees Association Vs ITO(E) assessee has not filed any documentary evidence in support of the claim of exemption U/s 10(24) of the Act. All these documents filed by the assessee are additional evidences first time produced before the Tribunal, therefore, the claim of the assessee cannot be accepted when the assessee itself has failed to furnish the return of income as well as documentary evidences in support of the claim. She has relied upon the orders of the authorities below.
We have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant material on record. It emerges from the record that the assessee has not filed any return of income U/s 139(1) of the Act and the A.O. has initiated reassessment proceedings U/s 147/148 of the Act by issuing notice U/s 148 of the Act on 29/03/2017 on the basis of AIR information showing the interest income received by the assessee from SBBJ. Though the assessee filed its return of income on 04/10/2017 showing NIL income after claiming exemption U/s 10(24) of the Act. However, the A.O. has not accepted the said return of income being filed belatedly. We note that the A.O., at the time of reopening of assessment, proposed to assess the interest income of Rs. 5,37,185/- whereas the assessee in the return of income has shown the interest income of Rs. 7,51,549/- and the other income being the rental income
6 ITA 851/JP/2019_ All Rajasthan SBBJ Employees Association Vs ITO(E) of Rs. 2,92,200/- total amounting to Rs. 10,43,749/-. The A.O. has not disputed this income as declared by the assessee in the return of income. However, the exemption claimed by the assessee U/s 10(24) of the Act was denied by the A.O. and consequently, the entire income as shown in the return of income has been assessed to tax while framing the reassessment order on 23/12/2017. Since no body has appeared and attended the proceedings before the ld. CIT(A), therefore, the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by impugned order passed ex parte. It is pertinent to note that even the documentary evidence regarding the registration of the assessee’s Trade Union was not produced either before the A.O. or before the ld. CIT(A), therefore, in these facts and circumstances the assessee has now produced all the documentary evidences to show that the assessee is a registered Trade Union and the income during the year was earned from interest from the bank deposits as well as rental income in respect of the property owned by the assessee. Since this explanation and documentary evidence were not available before the authorities below and the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex parte, therefore, in the interest of justice, we set aside the matter back to the record of the A.O. to frame the assessment de novo after considering all the
7 ITA 851/JP/2019_ All Rajasthan SBBJ Employees Association Vs ITO(E) documentary evidences regarding source of income and eligibility of the assessee for exemption U/s 10(24) of the Act.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only. Order pronounced in the open court on 04th June, 2020.
Sd/- Sd/- ¼foØe flag ;kno½ ¼fot; iky jko½ (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (VIJAY PAL RAO) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 04/06/2020 *Ranjan आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- All Rajasthan State Bank of Bikaner & 1. Jaipur Employees Association, Jaipur. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ITO (Exemptions) Ward-1, Jaipur. 2. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 3. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The CIT(A) 4. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 5. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 851/JP/2019) 6. vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,
सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत