M/S MR PRATAP PUBLIC CHARIABLE TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD-4, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 432/CHNY/2023Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 June 2023AY 2019-203 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the orders of the CIT(A) and CPC, remanding the matter back to the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer is to re-adjudicate the issue after the CBDT decides on the assessee's petition for condonation of delay in filing Form 10B.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust had disallowed expenses of Rs. 8,80,285/- due to not filing Form 10B along with the return of income. The assessee argued that this was a rectifiable defect and that a similar issue for an earlier assessment year was remanded by the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance of expenses for non-filing of Form 10B is valid, and if the defect is rectifiable under Section 139(9) of the Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139(9),Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ (SMC

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH

Hearing: 14.06.2023Pronounced: 16.06.2023

आदेश /O R D E R This appeal filed by the assessee is arising out of order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi vide order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022-23/ 1051152933 (1) dated 23.03.2023. The impugned intimation u/s.143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) was passed by order dated 11.05.2020 for the relevant assessment year

- 2 - 2019-20 by the CPC., Bengaluru, by disallowing expenses amounting to Rs.8,80,285/-.

2.

For this issue, the assessee has raised various grounds, including that the assessee has not filed Form No.10B along with return of income. The assessee has raised various issues vide ground no.2, which reads as under:- “2. The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the disallowance of charitable expenses amounting to Rs.8,80,285/ -and adding to the total income of the appellant for not filling the Form-10B along with the return of Income.

1.

2.1 The Appellant had not been given an opportunity to rectify any defects in filing of the return as per Section 139(9) read with Explanation thereto. As this is a rectifiable defect u/s. 139(9), the return and report should not have been rejected by the Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals).

2.2 The Commissioner of Incometax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that identical issue for the earlier assessment year 2018-19, the Honb'le ITAT in ITA No-83/2023 by order dated- 27.02.2023 has remanded the matter back to the file of assessing officer with direction to re-adjudicate the issue for condoning delay in filing Form No.10B after decision of the CBDT.”

3.

Now, at the time of hearing, learned counsel for the assessee stated that he is ready to go back to the Assessing Officer, in case, other issues on merits are kept open for adjudication by the Assessing Officer, as the assessee has moved a petition before the CBDT for condonation of delay in filing Form No.10B. When this fact was pointed out to the learned Senior DR, he raised no objection.

4.

After hearing both the sides, I am keeping the issues legal as well as issue on merits as open and the Assessing Officer will re- adjudicate the same after decision of the CBDT, whether condoning delay in filing Form No.10B or not. The Department will also take steps to get decision of CBDT at the earliest on the assessee’s condonation petition in Form No.10B. The assessee will also pursue the matter with CBDT. In terms of above, order of the CIT(A) and that processing by CPC u/s.143(1) are set aside and matter is remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer.

5.

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

More judgments on Section 139(9)

All 234 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139(9) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →