BHARATHI EDUCATIONAL TRUST,NAMAKKAL V. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, SALEM, SALEM

ITA 2428/CHNY/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Bharathi Educational Trust, which appealed against the order passed by the Addl/JCIT(A)-12, Mumbai for the assessment year 2018-19. The primary contention was a clerical error in mentioning the wrong section of the Income Tax Act in their audit report. Initially, the assessee mentioned section 10(23C)(iv) instead of the correct section 10(23C)(iiiad), which pertains to the exemptions they were claiming. The first appellate authority, CIT(A), had requested the assessee to upload Form 10B, which they failed to do, leading to the confirmation of the intimation order by the CPC. The Tribunal found that the assessee's request for an adjournment to upload the required form was not considered, and thus decided to remand the case for a fresh evaluation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 107554 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 21-11-2024
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 18-09-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R.ANITA
• Assessee Lawyers: T.S. LAKSHMI VENKATARAMAN
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(1); 10B; 10(23C)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी एस.एस. िवʷनेũ रिव, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी अिमताभ शुƑा, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2428/Chny/2024 िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Bharathi Educational Trust, 4/37, North Street, Kalappanayakkenpatti, Namakkal, Tamil Nadu 637 404. [PAN: AACTB0126E] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Salem. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, FCA ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 21.11.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 27.11.2024 आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 08.08.2024 passed by the Addl/JCIT(A)-12, Mumbai for the assessment year 2018-19. 2. The assessee filed his return of income and the same was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] and computed the income of the assessee at ₹.99,84,155/- as I.T.A. No.2428/Chny/24 2 against NIL income returned. The assessee filed an appeal before the NFAC along with written submissions stating that mistakenly the assessee mentioned the section as 10(23C)(iv) of the Act. It was also submitted that the mistake was a technical breach and that the assessee satisfies all conditions for claiming exemptions under section 10(23C) (iiiad) of the Act. The first appellate authority requested the assessee to upload a copy of Form 10B along with the date it was filed with the department. Since the assessee could not upload Form 10B, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the intimation order passed by the CPC. 3. Before us, the ld. AR Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.A. submits that the assessee wrongly mentioned section in its audit report in Form 10B. He submits that the assessee sought for an adjournment for uploading Form 10B as requested by the first appellate authority vide his notice dated 30.07.2024. However, without considering the adjournment petition, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee and prayed to remand the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration. 4. We note that the assessee filed written submissions before the first appellate authority by stating that the assessee wrongly mentioned the section in its audit report in Form 10B as 10(23C)(iv) instead of section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act as could be reflected at para 4.2 of the impugned I.T.A. No.2428/Chny/24 3 order. We also note that by considering the submissions of the assessee, the first appellate authority requested the assessee to upload copy of Form 10B vide his notice dated 30.07.2024. The contention of the ld. AR is that the assessee sought adjournment on 05.08.2024 for 15 days and the same was not considered. Before us, the ld. AR placed on record copy of Form No. 10B and prayed for an opportunity. Under the above facts and circumstances and in the interest of natural justice, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration by affording an opportunity to the assessee for filing/uploading Form 10B and to decide the issue on merits in accordance with law. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 27th November, 2024 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (AMITABH SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 27.11.2024 Vm/- I.T.A. No.2428/Chny/24 4 आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF. "