THE INDORE PENTECOSTAL CHURCH OF GOD,INDORE vs. DCIT (CPC) , BHOPAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 222/IND/2021Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 February 2023AY 2012-13Bench: MS.SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRIB.M. BIYANI (Accountant Member)5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the denial of exemption was based on the lack of evidence for Section 12A registration. However, the Section 143(1) intimation did indicate such registration. To resolve this discrepancy, the case was remanded to the CIT(A) for re-verification of the registration status.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act. The lower authorities denied this exemption, stating that the assessee lacked registration under Section 12A. The assessee contended that the Section 143(1) intimation itself mentioned 'Trust/Institution Registered u/s 12A'.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is eligible for exemption under Section 11 without proper evidence of registration under Section 12A, despite the Section 143(1) intimation suggesting otherwise.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11,Section 12A,Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: MS.SUCHITRA KAMBLE & SHRIB.M. BIYANI

For Appellant: Shri C.H. Padliya AR
For Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 08.02.2023Pronounced: 27.02.2023

आदेश/O R D E R

Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:

1.

Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 29.07.2021 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”], which in turn arises out of intimation of assessment dated 09.03.2019 passed by learned DCIT(CPC), Bangalore [“Ld. AO”] u/s 143(1) of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment- Year[“AY”] 2017-18, the assessee has filed this appeal on following grounds:

“1.That learned Commissioner of Income Tax appeals has earned in confirming the action of Ld. AO while processing the return only considering the receipts derived from the property of the trust and has not considered the application of such income both by applying the The Indore Pentecostal Church of God Assessment year 2017-18 provisions of section 11 and without applying the provision of that section. 2.That learned Commissioner of Income Tax appeals without considering the documents as submitted before him reached the conclusion that in absence of any document regarding approval under section 12A benefits of section 11 cannot be allowed.

3.

That learned Commissioner of Income Tax appeals without according or raising his query regarding submission of approval for section 12A denied the benefits of section 11 of the Act.

4.

That learned Commissioner of Income Tax appeals without referring the personal profile of the assessee available with the department and considering the audit report submitted before him in form 10B denied the benefit of section 11 of the Act.”

2.

Heard the learned Representatives of both sides at length and case- records perused.

3. The sole grievance of assessee raised in the grounds cited above is such that the lower authorities have wrongly denied exemption u/s 11 on the footing that the assessee does not have registration u/s 12A. Initially the disallowance was made by CPC in the intimation u/s 143(1) and thereafter, during first-appeal, the disallowance was upheld by Ld. CIT(A).

4. Ld. AR drew our attention to following observation made by Ld. CIT(A) in his order:

“5.4 In the Intimation u/s 143(1), the status of the appellant was shown as AOP/BOI. In the written submission appellant did not claim that the appellant Trust is registered u/s 12AA and did not furnish any evidence for the same. In [2007] 165 TAXMAN 533 (SC) U.P. Forest Corporation vs Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Lucknow, Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held Registration of a trust/institution under section 12A is a condition precedent for availing benefit under sections 11 and 12. In the present appeal, the appellant did not bring any material on record to establish that the appellant Trust is registered u/s 12AA. Hence respectfully following the above stated decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the disallowance of claim of deduction u/s 11 is upheld.”

The Indore Pentecostal Church of God Assessment year 2017-18 5. Then, the Ld. AR carried us to the intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act, relevant part of which is scanned below:

Referring to the same, the Ld. AR submitted that there is a clear mention as “Trust/Institution Registered u/s 12A” against the space marked as “Sub-status” in the intimation passed u/s 143(1) itself and therefore alleging that the assessee is not registered u/s 12A is not correct. As a matter of fact, the Ld. AR also pointed out that the assessee had also submitted auditor’s report in Form No. 10B as applicable to the institutions registered u/s 12A. Ld. AR strongly contended that the lower authorities have wrongly alleged that the assessee is not registered.

6.

Per contra, Ld. DR argued that the assessee has not filed any evidence even during first appellate proceedings to evidence the existence of The Indore Pentecostal Church of God Assessment year 2017-18 registration u/s 12A and that is why the Ld. CIT(A) had no option except to uphold the disallowance of exemption u/s 11 to assessee. Ld. DR urged to sustain the action of Ld. CIT(A).

7.

We have considered the submission of both sides and perused intimation u/s 143(1) as well as appeal order passed by ld. CIT(A). We note that the lower authorities have denied exemption to assessee for want of evidence of registration u/s 12A of the Act. We further observe that not only the Ld. AR is strongly claiming that the trust is actually registered u/s 12A but also the intimation u/s 143(1) is also taking cognizance of this fact against “sub-status” as scanned above. At that same time, we also find weightage in the submission of Ld. DR that in absence of evidence from assessee with regard to registration u/s 12A, the exemption cannot be allowed. Thus, to settle the rival claims, we are inclined to remand this case back to Ld. CIT(A) to re-verify the status of assessee i.e. whether it is really registered u/s 12A or not from the departmental record and also consider any evidence as may be submitted by assessee to prove the existence of registration and thereafter pass a needful order in accordance with the provision of law.

8.

Resultantly, this appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced as per Rule 34 of I.T.A.T. Rules, 1963 on 27/02/2023. Order pronounced in the open court on ….../……/2023.

More judgments on Section 11

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →