Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed its return in ITR-7 instead of ITR-V, leading to an adjustment of Rs. 15,83,820/- under Section 143(1) for the assessment year 2017-18. The CIT(A) confirmed this addition.
Held
The tribunal noted that the assessee sought to withdraw the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
Key Issues
The primary issue was whether the adjustment made under Section 143(1) was valid given the nature of the return filed and the exemptions claimed. However, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
Sections Cited
143(1), 10(34), 10(15)(iv)(h), 10(35), 143(1)(a), 139(5), 143(1)(a)(ii), 139(9)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL
This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 06.11.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2017-18, raising following grounds:
I. For that the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) dated 06.11.2024 for that the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) dated 06.11.2024 for that the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) dated 06.11.2024 for the assessment year 2017 the assessment year 2017-18 in confirming the addition of 18 in confirming the addition of exempted income of Rs. 15,83,820/ exempted income of Rs. 15,83,820/- by the intimation u/s by the intimation u/s 143(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961( hereinafter referred to as 143(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961( hereinafter referred to as 143(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961( hereinafter referred to as the said Act') is err the said Act') is erroneous, bad, perverse and in contradiction oneous, bad, perverse and in contradiction to the laws and facts. to the laws and facts. II. For that Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that since the For that Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that since the For that Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that since the return filed by the appellant in FORM ITR return filed by the appellant in FORM ITR-7 was erroneous and 7 was erroneous and defective as the appellant ought to have filed its return in defective as the appellant ought to have filed its return in defective as the appellant ought to have filed its return in FORM I FORM ITR-V to claim its unlawful exemptions, the said return V to claim its unlawful exemptions, the said return in ITR-7 being invalid could not be processed u/s 143(1) of the 7 being invalid could not be processed u/s 143(1) of the 7 being invalid could not be processed u/s 143(1) of the said Act and thus the assessment/ adjustment made under. said Act and thus the assessment/ adjustment made under. said Act and thus the assessment/ adjustment made under. Section 143(1) of the said Act disallowing the exempted income Section 143(1) of the said Act disallowing the exempted income Section 143(1) of the said Act disallowing the exempted income of Rs. 15,83,820/ of Rs. 15,83,820/- is bad, perverse, arbitrary and not is bad, perverse, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eyes of law. sustainable in the eyes of law. III. For that Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the appellant earned a For that Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the appellant earned a For that Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the appellant earned a sum of Rs. 54,24,864/ sum of Rs. 54,24,864/- for the said assessment year when the for the said assessment year when the returned income of the appellant is Rs. 38,41,040/ returned income of the appellant is Rs. 38,41,040/- which was not disputed not disputed IV. For that Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered that the income of For that Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered that the income of For that Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered that the income of the appellant Trust was exempted from tax inasmuch as it the appellant Trust was exempted from tax inasmuch as it the appellant Trust was exempted from tax inasmuch as it comprised of dividend income from Domestic Private Limited comprised of dividend income from Domestic Private Limited comprised of dividend income from Domestic Private Limited Company of Rs. 969,474/ Company of Rs. 969,474/- ( exempted u/s 10(34)) ; accrued ( exempted u/s 10(34)) ; accrued interest on IREDA Tax Free Bond of Rs. 5,98,500/ erest on IREDA Tax Free Bond of Rs. 5,98,500/ - ( exempted u/s 10(15)(iv)(h) ) and Long Term Capital Gains on the sale of u/s 10(15)(iv)(h) ) and Long Term Capital Gains on the sale of u/s 10(15)(iv)(h) ) and Long Term Capital Gains on the sale of tax free bonds of Rs. 15,846/ tax free bonds of Rs. 15,846/- (exempted u/s 10(35)) of the (exempted u/s 10(35)) of the said Act. said Act. V. For that Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered that the appellant For that Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered that the appellant For that Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered that the appellant Trust ought to have filed it's return in FORM ITR Trust ought to have filed it's return in FORM ITR- -V but had instead erroneously filed the same in FORM ITR instead erroneously filed the same in FORM ITR-7 and thus the 7 and thus the said return is not valid in law, no adjustment could have been said return is not valid in law, no adjustment could have been said return is not valid in law, no adjustment could have been made under Section 143(1)(a) of the said Act disallowing the made under Section 143(1)(a) of the said Act disallowing the made under Section 143(1)(a) of the said Act disallowing the lawful exe lawful exemptions. VI. For that Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the For that Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the For that Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the appellant Trust despite of best efforts couldn't rectify the return appellant Trust despite of best efforts couldn't rectify the return appellant Trust despite of best efforts couldn't rectify the return due to the portal being closed and the time to file revised due to the portal being closed and the time to file revised due to the portal being closed and the time to file revised return expired. return expired. VII. For that Ld. CITA) was not justified in holding For that Ld. CITA) was not justified in holding For that Ld. CITA) was not justified in holding that the appellant didn't file revised return under Section 139(5) of the appellant didn't file revised return under Section 139(5) of the appellant didn't file revised return under Section 139(5) of the said Act to claim exemption correctly without appreciating the said Act to claim exemption correctly without appreciating the said Act to claim exemption correctly without appreciating the fact that the time by which the appellant was notified, the time fact that the time by which the appellant was notified, the time fact that the time by which the appellant was notified, the time VIII. to file revised return expired and thus the same could to file revised return expired and thus the same could to file revised return expired and thus the same could neither be rectified nor a revised. be rectified nor a revised. IX. For that Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the impugned For that Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the impugned For that Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the impugned adjustment was made under Section 143(1)(a)(ii) and not adjustment was made under Section 143(1)(a)(ii) and not adjustment was made under Section 143(1)(a)(ii) and not Section 139(9) of the Act as claimed by the appellant and on Section 139(9) of the Act as claimed by the appellant and on Section 139(9) of the Act as claimed by the appellant and on the basis of records no violation is found on t the basis of records no violation is found on the records as he records as claimed by the appellant. claimed by the appellant. X. For that Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition For that Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition For that Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 15,83,820/ of Rs. 15,83,820/- at the stage of proceedings under Section at the stage of proceedings under Section 143(1) of the said Act thereby dismissing the appeal. 143(1) of the said Act thereby dismissing the appeal. 143(1) of the said Act thereby dismissing the appeal.
XI. For that the impugned order of CIT( For that the impugned order of CIT( A) dated 06.11.2024 in A) dated 06.11.2024 in dismissing the appeal is otherwise bad, erroneous and dismissing the appeal is otherwise bad, erroneous and dismissing the appeal is otherwise bad, erroneous and perverse. perverse.
At the very outset, learned counsel for the assessee submitted At the very outset, learned counsel for the assessee submitted At the very outset, learned counsel for the assessee submitted before the bench that the assessee seeks to withdraw the present before the bench that the assessee seeks to withdraw the present before the bench that the assessee seeks to withdraw the present appeal. A formal written request for appeal. A formal written request for withdrawal has also been withdrawal has also been placed on record. In view of the aforesaid submission, the appeal placed on record. In view of the aforesaid submission, the appeal placed on record. In view of the aforesaid submission, the appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn. stands dismissed as withdrawn.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open Court on nced in the open Court on 11/02 /02/2025.