PRATAPMAL JAWANTHRAJ BHANDARI CHARITABLE TRUST,CHENNAI vs. DCIT (EXEMPITONS), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 848/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 June 2024AY 2021-22Bench: SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI (Judicial Member), SHRI JAGADISH (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without providing an adequate opportunity to be heard. The matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed exemption under Section 11, but the CPC denied it because Form 10B was allegedly not filed on time. The assessee contended that Form 10B was filed before the due date and provided evidence, but the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order.

What were the issues?

Whether the exemption under Section 11 was rightly denied due to alleged late filing of Form 10B, and whether the CIT(A) erred by passing an ex-parte order without proper opportunity.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11,Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI & SHRI JAGADISH

Hearing: 22.05.2024Pronounced: 19.06.2024

Pratapmal Jawanthraj Bhandari The Dy. Commissioner of Charitable Trust, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions), 121 Pycrofts Road (1st Floor), Chennai. Royapettah, Chennai-600004. [PAN: AAATP-4699-J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथE की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri M. Karunakaran, Advocate GHथE की ओर से /Respondent by : Shri G. Suresh, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 22.05.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 19.06.2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2021-22 is against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, Addl/JCIT(A)-3, Bengaluru [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 18.03.2024 vide an intimation issued by CPC, Bengaluru dated 14.09.2022 u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”). :- 2 -:

2.

The CPC, Bengaluru in the intimation issued u/s. 143(1) of the Act has denied the exemption claimed by the assessee Trust u/s. 11 of the Act on the ground that audit report in Form-10B has not been filled within the prescribed time.

3.

The Ld. A.R has submitted that the assessee trust has been filed Form-10B for A.Y 2021-22 on 01.11.2021 under transaction ID- FOS000354454499. The Ld. A.R has submitted that the due date of submission of Form 10B for A.Y 2021-22 was 15.02.2022 which was further extended to 15.03.2200 and assessee has filled it on 01.11.2021. The Ld. A.R in support has submitted the copy of audited report and the evidence in support of uploading of Form 10B and contended that the Ld. CIT(A) without providing opportunity of being heard has held that Form-10B has not been filled as it is not seen on the e-filing portal .

4.

We have heard the rival contentions, and perused the materials available on record. We find that the order has been passed by Ld. CIT(A) ex-parte without providing adequate opportunity of being heard The assessee in support of its contention that Form 10B has been filled before the prescribed date has submitted the copy of Form 10b signed by auditor and the transaction ID by which document was :- 3 -: uploaded. We therefore remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate this appeal afresh in accordance with law, after giving reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

5.

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

Order pronounced on 19th June, 2024. (यस यस िव"ने" रिव) (जगदीश) (Jagadish) (SS Viswanethra Ravi) लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य /Accountant Member लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य सद"य / Judicial Member "याियक सद"य "याियक "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य चे"ई/Chennai, "दनांक/Dated: 19th June, 2024. EDN/-

More judgments on Section 11

All 7,190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →