PUNJAB POLICE WELFARE FUND,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI A.D.JAIN & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY
आदेश/ORDER
PER A.D.JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT
This is assessee's appeal for assessment year 2012-13 against the order dated 08.08.2023 passed by the ld.
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) NFAC, Delhi [in short ‘the ld. CIT(A)].
The assessee has raised the following grounds of
appeal:
ITA 600/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2012-13 2 “1. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in passing an ex-parte order without affording a proper opportunity of hearing which is against the principles of natural justice and as such the order passed is arbitrary and unjustified.
That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has further erred in upholding the reopening of the case resorting to the provisions of Section 148 in as much as there was no reason to believe that income had escaped assessment and as such the assessment framed is illegal, arbitrary and unjustified.
Without prejudice to the above, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has further erred in upholding treating the interest income at Rs.l,10,40,262/- as against Rs.69,29,723/- declared resulting in an addition of Rs.41,10,539/- leading to increase in gross receipts for the purpose of calculation of exemption u/s 11 and 12 of the Act in utter disregard of the explanations rendered which is arbitrary and unjustified.
That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) has further erred in upholding the action of the Assessing Officer treating subscription fund amounting to Rs.3,01,40,131/- to be a revenue receipt as against capital receipt/voluntary contribution declared by the assessee leading to increase in gross receipts for the purpose of calculation of exemption u/s 11 and 12 of the Act in utter disregard of the explanations rendered which is arbitrary and unjustified.
That the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has further erred in law as well as on facts in upholding the computation of shortfall for the purpose of claiming benefit of Section 11/12 at Rs.99,12,640/- after making the addition of Rs.41,10,539/- and Rs.3,01,40,131/- as challenged in Grounds 1 & 2 supra resulting in Gross receipts of Rs.4,12,47,094/- as against Rs.69,96,424/- declared which is illegal, arbitrary and unjustified.”
The brief facts of the case, as per the impugned order
are that proceedings u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961
were initiated against the assessee and notice u/s 148 of the
ITA 600/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2012-13 3 Act was issued on 25.03.2019. In response, the assessee
filed its return of income on 29.05.2019 declaring ‘Nil’
income. During the course of assessment proceedings,
notice u/s 142(1) of the Act and questionnaire, were issued
on ITBA E-filing Portal on different dates to call for
necessary information. In response, the assessee filed
necessary information on ITBA Portal. The Assessing
Officer, being not satisfied with the reply of the assessee,
issued a notice u/s 142(1) of the Act alongwith detailed show
cause on 05.12.2019. The assessee did not respond to the
said notice, therefore, another opportunity was given to the
assessee to file the reply on 10.12.2019. The assessee again
failed to furnish any explanation. Accordingly, the
Assessing Officer completed the assessment on the basis of
record and made an addition of Rs.99,12,640/- vide order
dated 20.12.2019.
Being aggrieved by the order passed by the Assessing
Officer, the assessee went in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Before
ld. CIT(A), notices u/s 250 on e-portal were issued on various
dates i.e., on 29.01.2021, 26.04.2022 and 25.07.2023, but no
compliance was made and no written submissions or any other
supporting document was filed by the assessee.
ITA 600/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2012-13 4 Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order and
confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer.
Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before this
Tribunal.
The ld. DR could not rebut the aforesaid factual
position.
We have heard the parties and have perused the
material on record. It is found that various notices, fixing
the dates of hearing, were issued through e-proceedings on
e-filing Portal. The assessee has contended that the then
Counsel of the assessee Shri Arvind Mehta, Advocate expired
during the Covid Pandemic on 05.05.2021 and due to this
fact, there was no representation before the ld. CIT(A). Copy
of Death Certificate has been filed. The ld. Counsel for the
assessee has requested that the matter may be sent back to
the ld. CIT(A) and the assessee may be given opportunity to
present its case. Merely uploading of information about the
date of hearing on the Income Tax Portal is not an effective
service of notice. The matter now stands covered by the
decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the
case of ‘Munjal BSU Centre of Innovation and
ITA 600/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2012-13 5 Entrepreneurship, Ludhiana through its authorized signatory
Shri Bharat Goyal Vs Commissioner of Income Tax (E),
Chandigarh’, in CWP 21028-2023 (O&M), wherein, vide order
dated 04.03.2024, their Lordships have held that the
provisions of Section 282(1) of the Income Tax Act and Rule
127(1) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, envisage that it is
essential that before any action is taken, a communication of
the notice must be in terms of these provisions; that these
provisions do not make mention of communication to be
“deemed” by placing the notice on the e-portal of the
Department; that an pragmatic view has always to be
adopted in these circumstances; that an individual or a
company is not expected to keep the e-portal of the
Department open all the times so as to have knowledge of
what the Department is supposed to be doing with regard to
the submissions of forms, etc.; and that the principles of
natural justice are inherent in the Income Tax provisions
and the same are required to be necessarily followed.
Accordingly, considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, the impugned order of the ld.CIT(A) is, hereby set aside
with a direction to the ld.CIT(A) to decide the appeal of the
assessee afresh, after giving proper and adequate
ITA 600/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2012-13 6
opportunity to the assessee to present its case. The assessee,
no doubt, shall cooperate in the fresh proceedings before the
CIT(A).
The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical
purposes.
Order pronounced on 13.06.2024.
Sd/- Sd/-
(KRINWANT SAHAY) (A.D.JAIN ) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER “Poonam” आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�/ CIT 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar
