SHREE PIYUSHPANI STHAPATYA SANGRAHALAY TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. ITO -EXEMPTION -2(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3103/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 August 2024AY 2021-223 pages
AI SummaryN/A

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the JCIT(A) should promptly decide the rectification application and rectify any mistake apparent on record. Accordingly, both appeals were restored to the file of the JCIT(A) for fresh adjudication of the issue after providing the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee's claimed expenses were disallowed by the CPC via intimation under section 143(1) of the Act. The assessee's appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed without adjudication on the specific grounds regarding disallowance of expenses for trust properties and establishment. Subsequently, an application filed under section 154 with the JCIT(A) for rectification received no action.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred by dismissing the appeal without deciding the grounds related to disallowance of expenses and whether the JCIT(A) erred by not acting on the rectification application under section 154 of the Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “K” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HONBLE & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, HONBLE

For Appellant: Shri Piyus Chaturvedi, A/R
For Respondent: Shri Kiran Unavekar, Sr. D/R

PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM: I.T.A. Nos. 3103 & 3104/Mum/2024, are two separate appeals preferred by the assessee against two separate orders of ld. CIT(A)/Addl./JCIT(A)-1 Bengaluru, dt. 29/03/2024 pertaining to AY 2021-22 and 2022-23 respectively.

2.

Since the grievance is common in both the appeals and since the underlying facts are identical, both the appeals are disposed of by this common order, for the sake of convenience and brevity.

3.

The common grievance in both the appeals relates to the disallowance made by CPC on expenditure incurred towards the object of the trust. The quantum may differ.

4.

Briefly stated the facts of the case are that vide intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act, the expenses claimed by the assessee were added back while processing the return by CPC against which the assessee preferred appeal before ld. CIT(A) and the appeal was dismissed. However, while dismissing the appeal, the ld. First Appellate Authority did not decide the relevant grounds taken by the assessee as disallowance of the expenses incurred towards properties of the trust and establishment expenditures.

5.

The assessee moved an application u/s 154 of the Act asking the JCIT(A) to rectify the mistake apparent on record but no action was taken by JCIT(A).

6.

After considering the facts, we are of the considered view that, the JCIT(A) should decide the application and rectify the mistake apparent from record as soon as possible. Accordingly, both these appeals are restored back to the file of the JCIT(A), who is directed to take proper action and decide the issue afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

7.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Court on 1st August, 2024 at Mumbai. Mumbai, Dated 01/08/2024

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →