M/s Mahakavi Edasseri Smaraka Trust, Thrissur V. The ITO Exemption Ward, Thrissur

ITA 59/COCH/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1776 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-02-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 17-01-2024
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 18-01-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: J.M.JAMUNA DEVI
• Keywords: Set aside; Charitable institution; Maximum Marginal Rate
• Section: 154; 139(1); 12A; 139; 12

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountant Member and Shri Manomohan Das, Judicial Member ITA No. 59/Coch/2023 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) Mahakavi Edasseri Smaraka Trust 0, Kumkumam, Kanattukara Thrissur 680001 [PAN:AADTM8374N] vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemptions) Thrissur (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: ----- None ----- Respondent by: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 18.01.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 29.02.2024 O R D E R Per: Sanjay Arora, AM This is an Appeal by the Assessee agitating the Order dated 21.12.2022 by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department [CITA)], dismissing the assessee’s appeal contesting the rectification of the processing under section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) of it’s return of income for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19 vide order u/s. 154 of the Act dated 08.01.2020. 2. None appeared for and on behalf of the assessee when the appeal was called out despite service of notice of hearing, nor was there any adjournment motion. There has in fact been no representation by/for the assessee in this case throughout, with the Bench on each occasion the matter was listed for hearing, observing this, allowing opportunity toward the same, also requiring filing of Vakalath/PoA. Under the circumstances, hearing in the matter was proceeded with ex parte the assessee- appellant, who stands allowed an opportunity even after a final opportunity. ITA No. 59/Coch/2023 (AY : 2018-19) Mahakavi Edasseri Smaraka Trust v. Income Tax Officer 2 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee, a charitable trust, registered u/s. 12A of the Act (on 15.06.2015), filed it’s return of income for the relevant year on 14.09.2018, disclosing income at Rs.87,430, i.e., after deducting 15% of it’s gross income of Rs.1,02,862, returning nil tax liability thereon. The same was processed u/s. 143(1)(a) of the Act, denying the same and computing the tax liability on the returned gross income at Rs.30,858. The assessee moved a rectification application on 12.11.2019, disputing the said adjustment to it’s returned income. The said application is not on record for us to ascertain if the assessee had also disputed the tax rate applied in determining it’s tax liability on the assessed income. The rectification order, which is in the form of a statement, reiterates the Revenue’s stand, so that the assessee, unsuccessful in the first, is in second appeal before us. 4. We have heard the party before us, and perused the material on record. 4.1 The issue arising in the instant case, and toward which we have perused the impugned order and also the grounds raised before the first appellate authority, is the manner in which the income of such an Institution is to be computed in the absence of any application of income, i.e., if the allowance for 15% of the income from property held under trust is to be allowed u/s. 11(1)(a) of the Act or not. The relevant part of the impugned order read as under: ‘7.2 Thus it is seen that the appellant has claimed a deduction of Rs. 15429/- from its total gross receipt of Rs. 1,02,862/- and offered an adjusted total income of Rs. 87,433/- in its return of income. However, the deduction claimed by the appellant for Rs. 15,429/- being 15% of the gross receipts accumulated or set apart for application to charitable or religious purposes is not allowable to the appellant because the appellant has not reflected any application of funds for its purposes in respect of the remaining 85% of the gross receipts. Therefore, the adjustment made by the CPC is upheld and the grounds nos. 2 & 3 are dismissed.’ (emphasis, ours) 4.2 Section 11(1)(a) of the Act, also read out during hearing, reads as under: Income from property held for charitable or religious purposes. 11. (1) Subject to the provisions of sections 60 to 63, the following income shall not be included in the total income of the previous year of the person in receipt of the income— ITA No. 59/Coch/2023 (AY : 2018-19) Mahakavi Edasseri Smaraka Trust v. Income Tax Officer 3 (a) income derived from property held under trust wholly for charitable or religious purposes, to the extent to which such income is applied to such purposes in India; and, where any such income is accumulated or set apart for application to such purposes in India, to the extent to which the income so accumulated or set apart is not in excess of fifteen per cent of the income from such property; (b) to (d) ......... 4.3 The issue arising, in fine, is the applicability of section 11(1)(a) of the Act in the absence of any application of its income for it’s objects by the assessee, a charitable trust, during the relevant year. We see no reason for it being not so, and neither has any been stated by the Revenue at any stage. The language of the provision is unambiguously clear, so that an assessee is not entitled to, save where an option is specifically exercised in its respect, and before expiry of the time allowed for furnishing the return of income u/s. 139(1) of the Act, accumulate or set aside for application in excess of 15% of it’s income from the property held under trust. That is to say, it is necessarily to, save where an option is specifically exercised in its respect – which is not so in the instant case, apply 85% of it’s income for charitable purposed during the relevant year. The assessee, as afore-said, having not done so, it’s income is accordingly to be limited thereto, i.e., 85% of it’s total income. A reading of Explanation 1 to section 11(1), reproduced hereunder, makes it abundantly clear that in the absence of option being exercised, the deeming qua application of income, which extends to the shortfall w.r.t. eighty-five percent of income derived from property held under trust, shall not apply: Explanation 1.—For the purposes of clauses (a) and (b),— (1) in computing the fifteen per cent of the income which may be accumulated or set apart, any such voluntary contributions as are referred to in section 12 shall be deemed to be part of the income; (2) if, in the previous year, the income applied to charitable or religious purposes in India falls short of eighty-five per cent of the income derived during that year from property held under trust, or, as the case may be, held under trust in part, by any amount— (i) for the reason that the whole or any part of the income has not been received during that year, or (ii) for any other reason, ITA No. 59/Coch/2023 (AY : 2018-19) Mahakavi Edasseri Smaraka Trust v. Income Tax Officer 4 then— (a) in the case referred to in sub-clause (i), so much of the income applied to such purposes in India during the previous year in which the income is received or during the previous year immediately following as does not exceed the said amount, and (b) in the case referred to in sub-clause (ii), so much of the income applied to such purposes in India during the previous year immediately following the previous year in which the income was derived as does not exceed the said amount, may, at the option of the person in receipt of the income (such option to be exercised before the expiry of the time allowed under sub-section (1) of section 139 for furnishing the return of income, in such form and manner as may be prescribed) be deemed to be income applied to such purposes during the previous year in which the income was derived; and the income so deemed to have been applied shall not be taken into account in calculating the amount of income applied to such purposes, in the case referred to in sub-clause (i), during the previous year in which the income is received or during the previous year immediately following, as the case may be, and, in the case referred to in sub-clause (ii), during the previous year immediately following the previous year in which the income was derived. The application in the instant case being nil, the shortfall extends to the entire 85%. 4.4 We are conscious that the assessee did not file an appeal against the Intimation u/s. 143(1)(a) of the Act raising the impugned demand, preferring instead rectification thereof, scope of which is severely limited. This, to our mind, would not constrain us inasmuch as the Revenue itself has made the impugned adjustment under summary proceedings u/s. 143(1)(a), the scope of which is, again, limited to apparently incorrect claims, which is not the case. The assessee shall accordingly be assessed at the returned income of Rs.87,430. 4.5 Continuing further, even as observed by the Bench during hearing, the principal issue arising in the instant case, inasmuch as it is this that leads to the impugned demand, is the tax rate applied, which has been by the Revenue at the maximum marginal rate, duly raised by the assessee per its grounds of appeal before us. The assessee surely did not raise this issue before the ld. CIT(A), whose adjudication accordingly does not include the same. We, nevertheless, consider the ITA No. 59/Coch/2023 (AY : 2018-19) Mahakavi Edasseri Smaraka Trust v. Income Tax Officer 5 same, being a legal issue, with the relevant facts available on record, adjudicating the same in disposal of the appeal, upon hearing Smt. Devi, the ld. Sr. DR. 4.6 We again find no reason for application of section 167B of the Act, prescribing the maximum marginal rate in the instant case, which is one of a charitable trust. Section 167B, as a reading of the provision would show, is only where the shares of the beneficiaries of the trust are not known. The assessee, registered as a charitable trust, is a public body and, accordingly, there is no question of it’s beneficiaries being individual members, whose shares have therefore to be defined. The application thereof in the instant case is wholly misconceived. The matter in fact stands clarified by the Board per it’s Circular No. 320, dated 11/01/1982, also binding on the Revenue. The tax rate accordingly is to be computed as per the normal rates as applicable to Association of Persons. The same, in our view, is again an apparent mistake and, where contested, outside the ambit of s. 143(1)((a) in the first instance, so that it could not have been effected there-under. 4.7 We decide accordingly. 5. In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced on February 29, 2024 under Rule 34 of The Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 Sd/- Sd/- (Manomohan Das) Judicial Member (Sanjay Arora) Accountant Member Cochin, Dated: February 29, 2024 n.p. Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent By Order 3. The Pr. CIT concerned 4. The Sr. DR, ITAT, Cochin 5. Guard File Assistant Registrar ITAT, Cochin