HMIL SHAREHOLDING (TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT-1994) TRUST NO.2,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 6(1)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3891/MUM/2024Status: HeardITAT Mumbai03 October 2024AY 2022-23Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON'BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, HONBLE (Judicial Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The assessee moved an application under section 154 to rectify the intimation and compute tax on slab rate basis. The CPC processed the application and granted the relief sought. Since the relief was granted by the CPC, the appeal before the Tribunal became infructuous.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2022-23. The appeal was related to the rate of tax to be applied on income earned by the Trust. The assessee sought to be taxed at slab rates, while the CPC had taxed it at Maximum Marginal Rate. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal as it was filed beyond the statutory time limit.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee's appeal is infructuous due to relief granted by the CPC in rectification. Whether the assessee is liable to be taxed at Maximum Marginal Rate or slab rates.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 167B,Section 164(1),Section 143(1),Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “H (SMC

Before: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE & SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri Motichand Gupta, A/R
For Respondent: Shri Ram Prakash Rastogi, Sr. D/R
Hearing: 03/10/2024Pronounced: 03/10/2024

सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 03/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 03/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R

PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM:

1.

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order dated 11/06/2024 passed by ld. CIT(A)-1, Mumbai [hereinafter ‘ld. CIT(A)’] pertaining to AY 2022-23.

2.

The grievance of the assessee reads as under:- “Being aggrieved by the order of the Id. AddI/JCIT(A), the Appellant begs to prefer the present appeal on the following grounds which are without prejudice to each other:

1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld Assessing Officer and the Ld First Appellate Authority erred in facts as well as in law by treating the appellant as an Association of Person.

2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld Assessing Officer and the Ld First Appellate Authority erred in facts as well as in law by determining the tax liability of the Appellant at Maximum Marginal Rate (MMR).

3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld Assessing Officer and the Ld First Appellate Authority has erred in facts as well in law, in computing the tax liability of the Appellant by applying section 167B of the Act, without appreciating the fact that the appellant is not an Association of Person and merely acting as a representative.

4.

That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld Assessing Officer and the Ld First Appellate Authority has erred in facts as well in law, in not computing the tax liability of the Appellant under section 164(1) of the Act read with proviso (iv), at the slab rates.

5.

That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. Addi/JCIT(A) has erred in holding the delay in filing of the appeal by the Appellant as without 'sufficient cause', and dismissing the appeal without any discussion on merits.

6.

That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. Addl/JCIT(A) has erred in not rectifying the mistake that had crept in while filing the Return of Income by the accountants of Appellant.

7.

That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. Addi/JCIT(A) has erred in disposing off the appeal without granting the Appellant Trust an opportunity of being heard.

8.

That the Appellant craves leave to add to or alter, by deletion, substitution, or otherwise, any or all of the foregoing grounds of appeal at or before the hearing, and to submit such statements, documents, and papers as may be considered necessary either at or before the appeal hearing.

3.

The assessee has moved the following application dt. 03/10/2024:- “To The Deputy

More judgments on Section 167B

All 178 judgments and leading authorities on Section 167B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →