Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a trust engaged in charitable activities, filed its return which was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. Income was denied and receipts were brought to tax. A rectification application under Section 154 was rejected, and an appeal against the 143(1) order was dismissed by the CIT(A).
Held
The Tribunal noted that an appeal against a Section 143(1) intimation is not maintainable once a Section 154 order has been passed, as the 143(1) order merges with the 154 order. The CIT(A) failed to consider this fact.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal against the Section 143(1) intimation was maintainable after a Section 154 order was passed, and whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without considering this merger.
Sections Cited
12A, 143(1), 154
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR
आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Addl/JCIt(A)-2, Bengaluru dated 31/12/2024 passed in Appeal No. NFAC/2021-22/10259364 for the assessment year 2022-2023. 2. It was submitted by the Ld. AR that the assessee is a trust which is doing charitable activities and is also being granted registration under section 12A of the Act. It was submission that the returned filed by the assessee was processed under section 143(1) of the Act on 31.03.2023 where in the application of the income had been denyied and the entire receipts of the assesee had been brought to tax. It was submission that the assessee had filed the rectification application u/s. 154 of the Act on 27.04.2023 and CPC have also rejected the 154 application on 27.04.2023. It was submission that against the 143(1) of the Act order the assessee had filed appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assesee and consequently, the assessee’s appeal before the Tribunal. It was submission that at this point it was brought to the attention of the Ld. AR that the assesee having filed 154 of the Act and 154 order have been passed, the order u/s. 143(1) of the Act could not have been made a subject matter of appeal in the appeal before CIT(A) and it was the 154 order which was to be taken in appeal before the CIT(A). AT this point the Ld. AR did not have any submission to make. It was the prayer that the issue may be restored to the file of the AO for readjudication.
In reply, the Ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the order of the CIT(A).
We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the facts of the present case clearly shows that the 143(1) intimation dated 31.03.2023 and on the said intimation rectification application has been filed and the same has been disposed by an order dated 27.04.2023. This has also been brought to attention to Ld. CIT(A) for purpose of condonation of delay. We are unable to understand how an appeal against the intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act could have been filed when a 154 order has already been passed in respect of the said intimation. Once an order u/s. 154 of the Act has been passed obviously the intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Act has merged with the said 154 order. Therefore, the appealable order in the present case would have been 154 order. These have facts have not been considered by Ld.JCIT(A)-2, Bengaluru when he has disposed the appeal. This being so, in the interest of justice the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of Ld.JCIT(A) after granting adequate opportunity of being heard.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.