SFPS EMPLOYEES GRATUITY TRUST, CHENNAI V. Asst Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

ITA 369/CHNY/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2391 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-06-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 30-09-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 143(1)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ ᭠यायपीठ, चे᳖ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI Įी महावीर ͧसंह, उपाÚय¢ एवं ᮰ी जी. मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद᭭य के समᭃ BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 369/CHNY/2021 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ /Assessment Year: 2018 - 19 SFPS Employees Gratuity Trust, No.145, 1 st Floor, Santhome High Road, Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004. PAN: AATTS 0132Q v. The ACIT, Non-Corporate Ward-3(5), Chennai. (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT स ु नवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing : 28.06.2022 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 28.06.2022 आदेश /O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi in Appeal No. CIT(A), Chennai-6/10341/2019-20, order dated 02.08.2021. The return of income was processed by the ADIT, CPC, Bangalore for the assessment year 2018-19 u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’) vide order dated 12.02.2020. 2 I.T.A. No.369/Chny/2021 2. At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee drew our attention to Ground No.5, which reads as under:- 5. The CIT(A) erred in deleting the appeal assuming that the issue involved was deduction u/s.80P(2)(a) though in the appellants case, the issue involved was exemption of the appellant’s income u/s.10(25)(iv). 3. The ld.counsel for the assessee took us through the order of CIT(A) and stated that the issue before CIT(A) was adjudication of exemption u/s.10(25)(iv) of the Act, whereas CIT(A)’s decision is on the issue of 80P(2)(a) of the Act. The ld.counsel stated the CIT(A) was not at all aware and it seems that it is a cut, paste order and decision given on the facts of some other case. 4. When these facts were confronted to ld. Senior DR, he could not controvert the above fact situation. 5. After hearing both sides and going through the order of CIT(A) particularly decision, we noted that the issue before CIT(A) for adjudication was exemption u/s.10(25)(iv) of the Act and not, what he has adjudicated i.e., the claim of deduction u/s.80P(2)(a) of the Act. Hence, we set aside the order of CIT(A) and remand the matter back to his file for fresh adjudication. Needless to say, the 3 I.T.A. No.369/Chny/2021 CIT(A) will allow reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 28 th June, 2022 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (जी. मंजुनाथ) (G. MANJUNATHA) लेखा सद᭭य /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (महावीर ᳲसह ) (MAHAVIR SINGH) उपा᭟यᭃ /VICE PRESIDENT चे᳖ई/Chennai, ᳰदनांक/Dated, the 28 th June, 2022 RSR आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुᲦ (अपील)/CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयुᲦ /CIT 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध/DR 6. गाडᭅ फाईल/GF.