Hidayatullah National Law University Through Its Registrar V. National e-Assessment Centre and Assessing Officer Income Tax Department (Exemption Wing) and National Faceless Assessment Centre

WPT/144/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Hidayatullah National Law University challenging the legality, validity, and propriety of two orders related to tax exemption and penalty under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner had initially been granted an exemption for the assessment year 2018-19, which was later found to have an error in the specified assessment year. Although a rectification application was filed, the assessment and penalty orders were passed before the rectification was acknowledged. The petitioner sought to withdraw the petition, opting to pursue alternative remedies for the correction of the orders.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 799692 (HC-CHHATTISGARH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 09-05-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Applicant
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: AJAY KUMRANI
• Assessee Lawyers: AMRITO DAS
• Keywords: Assessment; Exemption; Penalty; Rectification
• Section: 10(23C)(vi); 270(A)

Judgement Text

"1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPT No. 144 of 2022 Hidayatullah National Law University Through Its Registrar, Uparwara Village, Tehsil Abhanpur, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner Versus 1. National e-Assessment Centre 4th Floor, Mayur Bhawan, Connaught Circus, New Delhi - 110001, Delhi 2. Assessing Officer Income Tax Department (Exemption Wing), Income Tax Colony, Katora Talab, Civil Lines, Raipur - 492001, Chhattisgarh 3. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, Room No. 401, 2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi - 110003 ---- Respondents _______________________________________________________________ For Petitioner : Shri Amrito Das, Advocate For Respondents : Shri Ajay Kumrani, Advocate appears on behalf of Shri Amit Chaudhari, Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal Order On Board 09.05.2022 1. By way of this petition, the Petitioner has challenged the legality, validity and propriety of the orders dated 26.03.2022 (Annexure P-1) and 15.04.2021 (Annexure P-2). 2. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that on 30.09.2018, an application (Annexure P-3) was made seeking grant of exemption under Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred to as the 'Act, 1961') for the year 2018-19 and upon due consideration of it, the Commissioner, Income Tax 2 (Exemption), Bhopal, vide its order dated 19.09.2019 (Annexure P-4) has granted its approval under the said provision. However, while passing the said order, the assessment year was inadvertently made therein as 2019-20 instead of 2018-19 and immediately upon knowing the said error, an application for its rectification was made on 30.09.2019 (Annexure P-5). It is contended further that in the meantime, the Respondent authorities have initiated the assessment proceedings for the year 2018-19 and the assessment order has been passed on 15.04.2021 (Annexure P-2) and thereafter, the penalty has been imposed upon the Petitioner in exercise of the powers under Section 270-A of the Act, 1961 vide order impugned dated 26.03.2022(Annexure P-1). 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that during the pendency of the aforesaid proceedings, it was pointed out that an application for rectification of the order dated 19.09.2019(Annexure P-4) has already been pending and accordingly praying for awaiting the order on the said application. However, without considering the said prayer, impugned orders dated 26.03.2022 and 15.04.2021 (Annexures P-1 and P-2) have been passed. Further contention of him is that the application which was made on 30.09.2019 (Annexure P-5) for rectification of the order dated 19.09.2019 (Annexure P-4) passed by the Commissioner, Income Tax (Exemption), Bhopal was allowed and the said order was rectified on 29.04.2022 (Annexure P-8), that is, subsequent to the passing of impugned orders (Annexures P-1 and P-2). He, therefore, 3 submits that the orders impugned (Annexures P-1 and P-2) as passed by the Respondent authorities are vitiated with regard to the said fact, particularly when the order dated 19.09.2019 exempting the Petitioner from payment of tax under Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act, 1961 was rectified. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the Respondents submits that the petition as framed is not maintainable as the alternative remedy for rectification of alleged mistake could be made by the Petitioner before the concerned authority in accordance with law and, who in turn, shall consider the same. 5. In view of above, learned counsel for the Petitioner, prays for withdrawal of this petition with liberty to avail the alternative remedy as provided under the law for correction and/or modification of the orders impugned (Annexures P-1 and P-2). 6. Prayer is allowed. 7. The petition is accordingly disposed of as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. Sd/- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) JUDGE sunita "