COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV vs. XAVIER KELAVANI MANDAL PVT LTD

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/1362/2011HC GujaratGJHC24025737201105 September 2012Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the provision regarding furnishing of the audit report along with the return is procedural and directory, not mandatory. Substantial compliance is sufficient. The Court relied on its own decision in CIT v. Gujarat Oil and Allied Industries Ltd., which held that an audit report can be produced at the appellate stage if there is substantial compliance. The Court also referred to the Punjab and Haryana High Court's decision in CIT v. Shahzadanand Charity Trust, which reiterated that exemption should not be denied solely due to a delay in furnishing the audit report, and it can be produced at a later stage before the AO or appellate authority with sufficient cause. The Tribunal's finding that the audit report was obtained prior to filing the return and that there was a delay due to specific facts supported by an affidavit was accepted. The Tribunal was justified in directing the AO to accept the audit report and grant exemption under Section 11. The appeal was dismissed as devoid of merit and raising no substantial question of law.

What were the facts?

The Revenue has filed an appeal against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) for Assessment Year 2006-07. The assessee, Xavier Kelavani Mandal Pvt Ltd, had claimed exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer (AO) denied this exemption because the assessee failed to furnish the mandatory audit report in Form No. 10B along with its return of income, as required by Section 12A(b) read with Rule 17B. The assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], who allowed the assessee to file the audit report at the appellate stage and granted the exemption. The Revenue's appeal against the CIT(A)'s order was dismissed by the ITAT, leading to the present appeal before the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in directing the Assessing Officer to accept an audit report from the assessee which was not filed during the course of assessment proceedings and to grant exemption under Section 11 of the Act? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the audit report was obtained prior to filing the return, and there was a delay in filing it due to specific reasons supported by an affidavit. The assessee also pointed out that in earlier and subsequent assessment years, the audit report was filed, and exemption was granted. The assessee relied on the decisions of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in CIT v. Shahzadanand Charity Trust and the Calcutta High Court. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue contended that the audit report was not filed during the assessment proceedings, and therefore, the exemption under Section 11 should not be granted. The Revenue's appeal was based on the proposed substantial question of law regarding the acceptance of a belated audit report and the grant of exemption.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11,Section 260A,Section 12A(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
TAXAP/1362/2011 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL No. 1362 of 2011 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.V. ANJARIA ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV - Appellant(s) Versus XAVIER KELAVANI MANDAL PVT LTD - Opponent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MS PAURAMI B SHETH for Appellant(s) : 1, None for Opponent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.V. ANJARIA Date : 05/09/2012

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.V. ANJARIA) The present appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 preferred by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 17.06.2011 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench `C' in ITA No.2050/Ahd/2009 for the assessment year 2006-07.

1.

1 The following question is proposed by the appellant as a substantial

TAXAP/1362/2011 2/4 JUDGMENT question of law. “Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in directing the Assessing Officer to accept the audit report from the assessee which was not filed during the course of assessment proceeding and to grant exemption u/s.11 of the Act?”

2.

We heard learned advocate Ms. Paurami Sheth for the appellant.

3.

The issue in narrow compass and is about the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) directing acceptance of audit report from the assessee and granting exemption under section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act' for sake of brevity).

3.

1 The assessee filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2006-

07.

On verification, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had not furnished audit report in Form No.10B, which was compulsory requirement for eligibility of exemption under section 11A of the Act as stated in section 12A(b) read with Rule 17B of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. Assessee was issued show cause notice as to why exemption claimed by it under section 11 should be disallowed. The Assessing Officer passed order denying the exemption. He taxed gross receipts without granting deduction of expenditure.

3.

2 In the appeal preferred by the assessee, the Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals) permitted the assessee to file the audit report and directed to accept the same by his order dated 16.04.2009 and the exemption under section 11 of the Act allowed. The Department filed appeal which came to be dismissed by the impugned order bringing the Department before this Court by way of present appeal.

TAXAP/1362/2011 3/4 JUDGMENT

4.

The question whether it is permissible to the assessee to produce the audit report at the appellate stage, has already been answered by this court in CIT v. Gujarat Oil and Allied Industries Ltd. [(1993) 201 ITR 325], wherein it is held that the provision regarding furnishing of audit report along with the return has to be treated as a procedural provision. It is directory in nature and its substantial compliance would suffice. In that case, the assessee had not produced the audit report along with the return of income, but produced before completion of the assessment. The Punjab and Haryana High Court in CIT v. Shahzadanand Charity Trust [228 ITR 292] has reiterated the same principle holding that the benefit of exemption should not be denied merely on account of delay in furnishing the same, and it is permissible for the assessee to produce the audit report at a later stage either before the Income Tax Officer or before the appellate authority by showing a sufficient cause. This decision of Punjab & Haryana High Court has been relied on by the Tribunal.

5.

In the above view, the Tribunal is eminently justified both in law and on facts in observing and holding as under:- “In this case, it is not in dispute that the audit report in prescribed form was obtained prior to filing of the return on 20/12/2006; therefore, there was no reason for the assessee to keep the audit report with it in order to loose the exemption. The assessee in the earlier as well as in the subsequent assessment years filed the audit report and got the exemption. The conduct of the assessee in earlier year and subsequent years would prove that due to the facts stated above there was delay in filing the audit report and the contention of the assessee was supported by the affidavit of Mohmad Iqbal Vohra (PB-4). The learned CIT(A) on proper appreciation of the facts and material on record in the light of the decisions of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court and the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court rightly directed the AO

TAXAP/1362/2011 4/4 JUDGMENT to accept the audit report of the assessee and grant exemption u/s.11 of the IT Act.”

6.

For the above reasons, the appeal of the Revenue is devoid of merit, raising no question of law much less any substantial question of law.

7.

Accordingly the appeal is dismissed. (V.M. SAHAI, J.) (N.V. ANJARIA, J.) (SN DEVU PPS)

More judgments on Section 11

All 7,190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →