JAME A RIYAZUL ULOOM,INDORE vs. CPC BANGALORE, INDORE
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI B.M. BIYANI
आदेश / O R D E R
Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:
Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 03.11.2023 passed by learned Addl./JCIT (Appeals), Varansi, which in turn arises out of intimation of assessment dated 20.09.2022 passed by CPC, Bangalore [“AO”] u/s 143(1) of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2021-22, the assessee has filed this appeal on following grounds:
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) has erred I confirming the order u/s 143(1) of CPC Bangalore wherein exemption u/s 11 had been denied due to non-registration u/s 12AB w.e.f. 01.06.2020 as claimed by CPC. It is prayed that exemption u/s 11
Page 1 of 8
Jame A Riyazul Uloom, Indore ITA No. 560/Ind/2023 – AY 2021-22
may kindly be allowed as being registered u/s 12AA, assessee was eligible for the same.
The controversy in present case is the allowability of exemption u/s
11/12 of the Act. Ld. AR for assessee made oral arguments as also filed a
Written-Synopsis. The Written-Synopsis filed by Ld. AR is a detailed
explanation of the facts, the mistake committed at lower-level and the
submissions-cum-prayer of assessee; hence the same is scanned and re-
produced below:
Page 2 of 8
Jame A Riyazul Uloom, Indore ITA No. 560/Ind/2023 – AY 2021-22
Page 3 of 8
Jame A Riyazul Uloom, Indore ITA No. 560/Ind/2023 – AY 2021-22
Page 4 of 8
Jame A Riyazul Uloom, Indore ITA No. 560/Ind/2023 – AY 2021-22
Page 5 of 8
Jame A Riyazul Uloom, Indore ITA No. 560/Ind/2023 – AY 2021-22
Page 6 of 8
Jame A Riyazul Uloom, Indore ITA No. 560/Ind/2023 – AY 2021-22
In short, the case of assessee is such that it is registered u/s 12AA of
the Act vide Order dated 29.09.2020 of CIT (Exemption) Bhopal and
therefore entitled to exemption u/s 11/12 w.e.f. AY 2020-21. Accordingly,
the assessee claimed exemption u/s 11/12 in the return of income of AY
2021-22. However, the AO denied exemption on the mistaken understanding
that w.e.f. 01.06.2020, the assessee was required to obtain registration
under newer scheme of section 12AB enacted through Finance Act, 2020.
The AO has, however, not taken into account that the requirement of
registration u/s 12AB was although initially introduced w.e.f. 01.06.2020
but subsequently omitted with retrospective effect from 01.06.2020 and
simultaneously re-introduced from 01.04.2021 by the Taxation and Other
Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 [“TOLA”]
w.e.f. 01.04.2021 due to Covid Pandemic. The relevant provisions of TOLA
are briefly re-produced below:
“CHAPTER III AMENDMENTS TO INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 4. In the Income-tax Act, 1961, -- XXX (VI) section 12AB shall be omitted and shall be deemed to have been omitted with effect from the 1st day of June, 2020; (VII) after section 12AA, the following section shall be inserted with effect from the 1st day of April, 2021, namely:- “12AB …….” 4. Therefore, it is quite clear that the assessee was not required to obtain
registration u/s 12AB for AY 2021-22 under consideration and the pre-
Page 7 of 8
Jame A Riyazul Uloom, Indore ITA No. 560/Ind/2023 – AY 2021-22
existing registration u/s 12AA was sufficient to entitle the assessee to claim
exemption u/s 11 and 12. Ld. DR for revenue could not rebut or contradict this proposition. Faced with this situation, we direct the AO to allow exemption u/s 11/12 as claimed by assessee in the return of income. The assessee succeeds in appeal.
Resultantly, this appeal is allowed.
Order pronounced in open court on 15.04.2024
Sd/- sd/- (VIJAY PAL RAO) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Indore िदनांक /Dated : 15.04.2024. CPU/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPY Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore
Page 8 of 8
