Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, Vinayaga Educational Trust, challenged an order by the CIT(A) for assessment years 2022-23. The main issue was the non-adjudication of its alternate plea regarding the taxation of net receipts instead of gross receipts.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had inadvertently omitted to adjudicate ground no.2, which related to the assessment of gross receipts. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) failed to adjudicate the assessee's grounds of appeal concerning the assessment of gross receipts and the alternative plea for taxation of net receipts.
Sections Cited
11, 12, 119(2)(b)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI & HON’BLE SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA
Vinayaga Educational Trust, Income Tax Officer, No.1, Vinayaga Nagar, Exemption Ward, Jedarpalayam, Namakkal, Salem Tamil Nadu-637 213. [PAN: AABTV5859K] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Shri.V.Meenakshi Sundar, C.A प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Smt.Samantha Mullamudi, Addl.CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 26.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 30.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M :
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA / APL / S / 250 / 2024-25 / 1069503082(1) dated 07.10.2024 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), for the assessment years 2022-23. 2.0 The only issue challenged by the assessee through its grounds of appeal numbers 1 to 3 is regarding the non-adjudication of its alternate plea by the Ld. First Appellate Authority. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the CPC had denied it benefit of exemption u/s 11 & 12 of the act as form-10B was not filed. It was stated that a request for condonation was pending before the CCIT. It is the case of the assessee that the Ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated its above grounds of appeal wherein request was made to alternatively tax the net receipt and not the gross receipts. The Ld Council for the assessee drew our attention to the order of this tribunal in ITA 2169-70 / Chny 2024 Dt. 13/12/2024 wherein placing reliance upon decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court relief was accorded to the assessee and net receipts were directed to be taxed. 3.0 The Ld. DR relied upon the order of lower authorities. 4.0 We have heard rival submissions in the light of material available on records. We have noted that in the appellate order on page 2, the Ld. CIT(A) has reproduced assessee’s grounds. Through ground of appeal no.2 the assessee had contested assessment of gross receipts. The Ld. CIT(A) as evident from para 5.3 of his order merely emphasized upon delayed submission of Form-10B and the powers of competent authority under section 119(2)(b) to condone it. The ground of appeal no.2 was inadvertently omitted to be adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, we set aside the order the Ld. CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate de novo all the grounds of appeal contested by the assessee before him by giving due opportunity of being heard and through a speaking order. The assessee shall comply with all statutory notices Page - 2 - of 3 issued by the Ld. CIT(A) and any non-compliance shall be adversely viewed. Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 5.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 30th , April-2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (मनु कुमार धिरर) (अधमताभ शुक्ला) (MANU KUMAR GIRI) (AMITABH SHUKLA) न्याधयक सदस्य / Judicial Member लेखा सदस्य /Accountant Member चेन्नई/Chennai, धदनांक/Dated: 30th , April-2025. KB/- आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy to: 1. अिीिार्थी/Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुक्त/CIT - Salem 4. तिभागीय प्रतितिति/DR 5. गार्ड फाईि/GF
Page - 3 - of 3