M/s Dayanand Welfare Education Society, Sirsa V. JCIT, Sirsa

ITA 1025/CHANDI/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 68429 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-08-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 15-07-2013
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 09-10-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Retrospective amendment
• Section: 143(3); 139

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH B, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI T.R. SOOD, A.M AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM ITA NO. 1025/CHD/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 M/S DAYANAND WELFARE V J.C.I.T. EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY SIRSA RANGE NATHU SARAI CHAUPTA SIRSA SIRSA AABTD 00269R (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY :SHRI M.R. SHARMA RESPONDENT BY:SHRI AKHILESH GUPTA DATE OF HEARING 15.7.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 23.8.2013 O R D E R PER T.R.SOOD, A.M THIS APPEAL IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30 .8.2012 OF THE LD. CIT(A), ROHTAK. 2. IN THIS APPEAL VARIOUS GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED BUT AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUB MITTED THAT ONLY DISPUTE IS REGARDING CONFIRMATION OF PENALTY U /S 272A(2)(E) OF THE ACT. 3. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO FILE THE RETURN U/S 139(4C) BY 31 J ULY, 2006 WHEREAS THE RETURN HAS BEEN FILED ON 20 TH JUNE, 2007. IN RESPONSE TO SHOW CAUSE NOTICE FOR LEVY OF PENALTY I T WAS CONTENDED THAT ASSESSEES INCOME DID NOT EXCEED THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT WHICH IS NOT CHARGEABLE TO INCOME-TAX HENCE PENALTY COULD NOT BE LEVIED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT FIND FORCE IN THE SUBMISSIONS. HE REFERRED TO CIRCULAR NO. 108 D ATED 20 TH MARCH 1973 ISSUED WITH REFERENCE TO SECTION 139(4A) . HE WAS 2 OF THE OPINION THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 139(4 A) AND 139(4C) ARE IDENTICAL THEREFORE, PENALTY IS LEVIABL E AND ACCORDINGLY LEVIED THE PENALTY AMOUNTING TO RS. 32 ,200/- 4 ON APPEAL THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 5 BEFORE US, THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE REITER ATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE PROVISION FOR FILING THE RETURN WAS INTRODUCED BY TAXATION LAWS AMENDMENT ACT, 2006 WITH RETROSPEC TIVE EFFECT FROM 1.4.2006. SINCE THIS PROVISION WAS INT RODUCED IN THIS YEAR AND THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT AWARE OF THE SAM E, THEREFORE, A LENIENT VIEW SHOULD BE TAKEN. 6 ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE ST RONGLY RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND TH E LD. CIT(A). 7 AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS WE FIND F ORCE IN THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE. SUB- SECTION (4C) OF SECTION 139 READS AS UNDER: [(4C) EVERY (A) [RESEARCH ASSOCIATION]REFERRED TO IN CLAUSE (2 1) OF SECTION 10; (B) NEWS AGENCY REFERRED TO IN CLAUSE (22B) OF SEC TION 10; (C) ASSOCIATION OR INSTITUTION REFERRED TO IN CLAU SE (23A) OF SECTION 10; (D) INSTITUTION REFERRED TO IN CLAUSE (23B) OF SEC TION 10; (E) FUND OR INSTITUTION REFERRED TO IN SUB-CLAUSE (IV) OR TRUST OR INSTITUTION REFERRED TO IN SUB-CLAUSE (V) OR ANY UNIVERSITY OR OTHER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION REFERRED TO IN [SUB-CLAUSE (IIIAD) OR] SUB-CLAUSE (VI) OR ANY HOSPITAL OR OTHER MEDICAL INSTITUTION REFERRED TO I N [SUB-CLAUSE (IIIAE) OR] SUB-CLAUSE (VIA) OF CLAUSE (23C) OF SECTION 10; (F) TRADE UNION REFERRED TO IN SUB-CLAUSE (A) OR A SSOCIATION REFERRED TO IN SUB- CLAUSE (B) OF CLAUSE (24) OF SECTION 10; [(G) BODY OR AUTHORITY OR BOARD OR TRUST OR COMMI SSION (BY WHATEVER NAME CALLED) REFERRED TO IN CLAUSE (46) OF SECTION 10; 3 (H) INFRASTRUCTURE DEBT FUND REFERRED TO IN CLAUSE (47) OF SECTION 10,] SHALL, IF THE TOTAL INCOME IN RESPECT OF WHICH SUCH [RESEARCH ASSOCIATION], NEWS AGENCY, ASSOCIATION OR INSTITUTION, FUND OR TRUST O R UNIVERSITY OR OTHER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION OR ANY HOSPITAL OR OTHER ME DICAL INSTITUTION OR TRADE UNION [OR BODY OR AUTHORITY OR BOARD OR TRUST OR CO MMISSION OR INFRASTRUCTURE DEBT FUND] IS ASSESSABLE, WITHOUT GIVING EFFECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 10, EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT WHICH IS NOT CHARGEABLE TO INCOME-TAX, FURNISH A RETURN OF SUCH INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR IN THE PRESCRIBED FORM AND VERIFIED IN THE PRESCRIBED MANNER AND SETTING FORTH SUCH OTHER PARTICULARS AS MAY BE PRESCRIBED AND ALL THE PROVISIONS OF THIS AC T SHALL, SO FAR AS MAY BE, APPLY AS IF IT WERE A RETURN REQUIRED TO BE FURNISH ED UNDER SUB-SECTION (1).] CAREFUL READING OF THIS PROVISION WOULD SHOW THAT R EQUIREMENT FOR FILING OF THE RETURN BY THE INSTITUTE REFERRED IN SUB-CLAUSE (IIIAD) OF SECTION 10(23C) OF THE ACT WAS INTRODUCE D BY TAXATION LAWS AMENDMENT ACT, 2006 WITH RETROSPECTIV E EFFECT FROM 1.4.2006. THE TAXATION LAWS AMENDMENT ACT, 20 06 HAS BEEN NOTIFIED FROM 14.7.2006. THUS IT IS CLEAR THA T THE REQUIREMENT WAS INTRODUCED FOR THE FIRST TIME ON 14 .7.2006 THOUGH WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT FROM 1.4.2006. IT IS ALSO TO BE NOTED THAT THE REQUIREMENT OF FILING OF RETURN IN C ASE OF AN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION CAME THROUGH TAXATION LAWS AMENDMENT ACT, 2006 AND NOT THROUGH NORMAL FINANCE ACT. AN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION WHICH IS LOCATED IN A RURAL AREA MAY NOT BE AWARE OF THE PROVISION WHICH HAS BEEN INTRODUCED THROUGH SPECIAL ACT. IN OUR OPINION, THIS CASE NEEDS LENIE NT VIEW PARTICULARLY BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAS ULTIMATELY FI LED THE RETURN VOLUNTARILY AND THE NIL RETURN OF INCOME HAS BEEN ACCEPTED IN ASSESSMENT FRAMED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT . ACCORDINGLY WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT( A) AND DELETE THE PENALTY. 8 IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23.8.2013 SD/- SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) (T.R. SOOD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 23.8.2013 SURESH COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT/THE C IT(A)/THE DR 4