INCOME TAX OFFICER( EXEMPTION), CUTTACK vs. COMPUTER APPLICATION CENTRE FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATION TRUST OF INDIA, CUTTACK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 193/CTK/2026Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 May 2026AY 2023-243 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) had correctly considered the factual matrix and found a rectifiable error in Form 10B. Since the error was rectified before the intimation and the revenue could not disprove the CIT(A)'s findings, no interference was warranted.

What were the facts?

The revenue filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) who had set aside the intimation under section 143(1). The CIT(A) found that there was a mistake in reporting in Form 10B, which was rectified by the assessee before the intimation was issued.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in setting aside the intimation under section 143(1) when the assessee had rectified a reporting error in Form 10B before the intimation was processed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Mishra, AR
For Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR
Hearing: 19.05.2026Pronounced: 19.05.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.193/CTK/2026 Assessment Year: 2023-24 ITO (Exemption), Cuttack Computer Application Centre for Research & Education Trust of India, Cuttack Vs Balisahi, Nuapada, Madhupatna, Cuttack- 753010 (PAN: AABTC 1078 P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by : Shri P. K. Mishra, AR Revenue by : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 19.05.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 19.05.2026

ORDER PER BENCH: This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of the Ld. Addl/JCIT(A)-Udaipur [hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] in appeal no. ADDL/JCIT(A) UDAIPUR/10067/2022-23 dated 29.12.2025.

2.

Shri P. K. Mishra, AR represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

ITA No.193/CTK/2026

3.

It was submitted by the ld. Sr. DR that there was a mistake apparent in the return filed and before the same was processed, it is noticed that the assessee has filed the necessary rectification of mistakes. It was submitted that the ld. JCIT has set aside the intimation u/s 143(1) by deleting the addition made. It was the submission that the order of the ld. JCIT is liable to be reversed.

4.

In reply, the ld. AR vehemently supported the order of the ld. JCIT.

5.

We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of para 3 and 4 of the order of the ld. JCIT clearly shows that the ld. JCIT has considered the factual matrix and has categorically given a finding that there was a mistake in misreporting at clause 37 of Form 10B by the tax auditor. This error has also been rectified before issuing the intimation u/s 143(1). This being so, as the ld. JCIT has deleted the addition made and as the revenue has not been able to dislodge the findings of facts as arrived at by the ld. JCIT, we find no error which is called for any interference.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed.

Kolkata, the 19th May, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rajesh Kumar] [George Mathan] लेखा सदस्य/Accountant Member न्याययक सदस्य/Judicial Member

Dated: 19.05.2026. RS

ITA No.193/CTK/2026

Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent – 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR),

//True copy// By order Assistant Registrar

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →