FRIENDS ASSOCIATES CHARITABLE TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. CPC WARD EXEMPT 1(1), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 504/DEL/2021Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 November 2022AY 2018-194 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the delay in filing Form No. 9A had been condoned by the CIT(Exemption). Therefore, the appeals were restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed deduction under Section 11(1)(2) of the Income Tax Act for amounts set apart for future application. The Assessing Officer disallowed this claim due to the non-filing of Form No. 9A along with the return of income.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance of deduction under Section 11(1)(2) was justified when the delay in filing Form 9A was condoned. Whether filing of Form 9A is mandatory for claiming deduction under Section 11(1)(2).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11(1)(2),Section 119(2)(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘H’, NEW DELHI

Before: SH. N.K. BILLAIYA & SH. KUL BHARAT

Hearing: 22/11/2022Pronounced: 22/11/2022
2.

Since common grievance is involved in both these appeals they were heard together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity.

3.

With the consent of the parties we are taking the facts of the for A.Y. 2017-18 as the basis for the adjudication of these appeals.

4.

The grievance of the assessee read as under :-

1.

That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed by Prescribed National Faceless Appeal Centre, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as CIT (A), is bad in law.

2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT (A) was not justified in upholding the action of AO in disallowing the deduction claimed u/s. 11 (1) (2) of the Income Tax Act ofRs.22,18,306/- on account of amount set apart for the purpose of application in future years by holding that assessee is not entitled for exemption claimed under section 11 (1) (2). 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(A) was not justified in upholding the action of the AO in rejecting the claim of assessee on the basis of erroneously interpretation of the provisions of Section 11 (1) (2) of the Act read with Rule 17 (1) which provides that for claiming deduction u/s. 11 (1) (2) of the Act report in Form No.9A should be filed alongwith the return of income are mandatory in nature.

4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(A) was not justified upholding the disallowing of deduction claimed by the assessee ignoring the fact that Form No. 9 A was filed on 20.03.2019 and assessment u/s. 143 (1) was completed on 10.11.2019 i.e. much before the completion of assessment proceedings.

5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(A) was not justified and highly arbitrary in contending that power for condone the delay has been granted to CIT(E) only for assessment Year A.Y. 2016-17 and for all subsequent year no such power are available with CIT(E).

6. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter and modify any of the grounds during the course of appellate proceedings.

5.

At the very outset the Counsel for the assessee stated that the only reason for denying the benefit was non filing of Form No.9A before the AO. The Counsel drew our attention to the orders of the CIT (Exemption), New Delhi and pointed out that the CIT (Exemption) has condoned the delay for A.Y.2017-18 and 2018-19.

6.

We have carefully perused the order for condonation of delay u/s. 119 (2) (b) of the IT Act by CIT (Exemption) dated 22.11.2021 for A.Y.2017-18 and 2018-19.

7.

Since the delay has been condoned, therefore, we restore the appeals to the files of the CIT(A) with a direction to decide the issues afresh on merits of the case and after affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

8.

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purpose. 9. Decision announced in the open court on 22.11.2022.

More judgments on Section 119(2)(b)

All 980 judgments and leading authorities on Section 119(2)(b) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →