KAMARAJ EDUCATIONAL TRUST,KRISHNAGIRI vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD, SALEM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2598/CHNY/2018Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 January 2022AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had failed to adjudicate the ground related to the exemption claim. Both parties agreed that the matter needed to be restored.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust claimed exemption under Section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2013-14. The Assessing Officer (AO) denied this claim. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)) did not adjudicate this specific ground of appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly adjudicated the claim for exemption under Section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act. The primary issue was the non-adjudication of a specific ground by the appellate authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGHAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

Hearing: 11.01.2022Pronounced: 18.01.2022

आदेश /O R D E R

PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP: This appeal by the assessee is arising out of order of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Salem in vide order dated 29.06.2018. The assessment was framed by the Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Salem for

1.

2 the assessment year 2013-14 vide order dated 31.03.2016 u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’).

2.

The only issue in this appeal of assessee is as regards to non- adjudication of Ground No.2 raised before CIT(A). The ld.counsel for the assessee took us through the grounds raised

in Form No.35 and the same is reproduced in the order of CIT(A), which is being reproduced herein below:-

2. The Appellant trust is running a school in Kaveripattinam (tk), Krishnagiri and for the F.Y.2012-13 the return of income was filed claiming exemption u/s 10(23c)(iiiad) of the Act.”

3.

The ld.counsel for the assessee took us through the order of CIT(A) para No.6, wherein the CIT(A) has adjudicated the issue in regard to the provisions of Section 12A(2) of the Act. The ld.counsel stated that the CIT(A) has not adjudicated the claim of exemption made u/s.10(23c)(iiiad) of the Act. When this was put to ld.senior DR, she fairly conceded that matter can be restored back to the file of the CIT(A). But, the ld.counsel stated that matter can be restored back to the AO. When again countered, the ld.senior DR agreed that adjudication is not done by CIT(A), whereas the AO has adjudicated this issue and denied the claim of exemption u/s.10(23c)(iiiad) of the Act by a speaking order.

3 4. After hearing rival contentions and perused the materials, we noticed that the CIT(A) has not adjudicated the above said ground No.2 and as both sides conceded, the matter has to be restored back. In our understanding, the AO has adjudicated the issue but the CIT(A) has not adjudicated the issue. Hence, it will be fair and reasonable to restore the matter back to the file of the CIT(A). We order accordingly.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 18th January, 2022 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 12A(2)

All 116 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A(2) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →