HARINGHATA MAHAVIDYALAYA,NADIA vs. ITO, WARD 43(1), NADIA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 11/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 October 2024AY 2018-19Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg (Judicial Member), Shri Rakesh Mishra (Accountant Member)3 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 Tribunal held that there is no provision in the Income Tax Act to deny exemption for late or non-filing of returns. The action of the lower authorities in denying exemption on this ground is not sustainable.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust sought exemption under Section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Income Tax Act. The exemption was denied by the lower authorities for late filing of the income tax return and filing it under the wrong section.

What were the issues?

Whether exemption under Section 10(23C)(iiiab) can be denied for late filing of return, and if filing under Section 139(4D) instead of 139(4C) disentitles the assessee from claiming the exemption.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139(1),Section 139(4D),Section 139(4C)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH KOLKATA

Before: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Assessment Year: 2018-19 Haringhata Mahavidyalay ………………....….......…....………....Appellant Subarnapur, Haringhata, Nadia, West Bengal-741249. (PAN:AAALH0658M) vs. ITO, Ward-43(1), Nadia ...............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances by: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Raja Sengupta, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing :July 03, 2024 Date of pronouncing the order :October 01, 2024 आदेश / ORDER संजय गग�, �याियक सद�य �ारा/ Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 30.10.2023 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)” passed u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”).

2.

The first issue involved in this appeal is as to whether the exemption u/s. 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act can be denied to the assessee trust for late filing of the income tax return i.e. beyond time specified u/s. 139(1) of the Act and secondly, if the return is required to be mandatorily filed then whether, the filing of the return u/s. 139(4D) instead of section 139(4C) of the Act disentitles the assessee from claiming the exemption u/s. 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act.

3.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has contended that there is no provision under the Income Tax Act vide which the exemption u/s. 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act can be denied to an assessee for non-filing or late filing of the income tax return as required u/s. 139 of the Act and within the period specified u/s. 139(1) of the Act.

4.

The Ld. DR could not point out any relevant provision or section under the Income Tax Act which disentitles the assessee from claiming exemption u/s. 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act for non-filing/late filing of the income tax return. Therefore, the action of the lower authorities in denying the exemption to the assessee on this ground is not sustainable.

5.

The second issue as to whether the filing of the return in wrong form i.e. Form u/s. 139(4D) instead of Form u/s. 139(4C) becomes irrelevant. In view of the above stated legal position the action of the lower authorities in denying exemption to the assessee cannot be held to be justified. The impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the Ld. AO is directed to grant exemption to the assessee as claimed u/s. 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed. Order is pronounced in the open court on 01.10.2024 Sd/- Sd/- [Rakesh Mishra] [Sanjay Garg] लेखा सद�य/Accountant Member �याियक सद�य/Judicial Member Dated: 01.10.2024.

JD Copy of the order forwarded to: 1.Haringhata Mahavidyalaya 2. ITO, Ward-43(1), Nadia 3. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr. CIT, 5. CIT(DR),

More judgments on Section 139(1)

All 8,117 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →