Gaytri Pariwar Trust, Dharamshala V. CIT Exemptions Ward , Solan

ITA 625/CHANDI/2022

AI Insights

The case involves the Gaytri Pariwar Trust, which appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) regarding a tax demand for the assessment year 2016-17. The trust argued that it was registered under section 12AA and thus exempt from income tax. The initial demand was due to non-verification of an audit report, but subsequent rectification reduced the demand to 'Nil'. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal due to a significant delay in filing, which the tribunal did not need to address after finding the appeal moot due to the rectification.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 127489 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-09-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Next Hearing Date: 27-08-2023
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 20-09-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJEEV KUMAR RANA
• Keywords: Ignorance of law
• Section: 154; 10B; 72

Judgement Text

आयकर अपील य अ धकरण,च डीगढ़ यायपीठ , च डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE: SHRI A.D.JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/. ITA No. 625/CHD/2022 नधा रण वष / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Gaytri Pariwar Trust, Lower Sham Nagar, Dharamshala. बनाम VS The CIT (Exemptions), Ward, Solan. थायी लेखा सं./PAN /TAN No: AABTG656R अपीलाथ /Appellant यथ /Respondent नधा रती क ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Sanjeev Kumar Rana, Advocate राज व क ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr.DR तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 28.08.2023 उदघोषणा क तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 18.09.2023 आदेश/ORDER PER A.D.JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT This is assessee's appeal for assessment year 2016-17 against the order dated 21.07.2022 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) NFAC, Delhi [in short ‘the CIT(A)]. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : 1. That the Ld. Assessing Officer erred to compute the tax amounted to Rs. 27280 because the society is registered u/s I2AA and exempted from Income Tax. 2. That the Ld. CIT appeal has not considered our grounds of appeal and not given the benefit of condonation of delay. ITA 625/CHD/2022 A.Y.2016-17 2 3. The facts of the case are that the assessee filed the Income Tax Return for the assessment year 2016-17 as per acknowledgement No. 435098031030916 dated 03/09/2016 in form ITR-7. That the Assessing Officer (in short ‘the AO’) issued the intimation u/s 143 with demand amounted to Rs. 27283/-. That the assessee applied for rectification u/s 154 as on 16.08.2017. The AO issued rectification order u/s 154 as on 28.09.2017 with demand amounting to Rs. 27283/-. (Copy of rectification available at pages no. 72 to 81). Due to online procedure the assessee society did not receive the intimation physically, so they could not submit reply to the AO. That due to non-verification of audit report in form 10B filed dated 15.07.2016, the ld. Assessing Officer raised the demand. 4. Against Rectification Order dated 28.09.2017, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A) on 23.05.2022, incurring a delay of 1705 days, due to replies to the rectification and further rectification application having been filed by the assessee before the AO and the intervening Covid Pandemic. 5. By virtue of the impugned order, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee, observing as follows : “3. I have gone through the submission of the appellant. In Form No.35, the appellant has mentioned that the order has been served on him on 21.08.2017. There is a delay of 1705 days in filing of appeal. Ignorance of law is no excuse, the appellant has been filing return every year and claiming exemption, he should be also aware of the procedures ITA 625/CHD/2022 A.Y.2016-17 3 involved. I do not find the reasons given by the appellant r easonable for delay in filing of appeal. The appellant should have responded to the matter when order was served on him. Therefore, the delay in filing of appeal is not condoned and the grounds of appeal filed by the appellant are rejected. The issue is not being decided on merits.” 6. During the proceedings before us, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the demand of Rs.27,280/- has been rectified and has been reduced to ‘Nil’. It is seen that the assessee had filed its return at ‘Nil’ income. However, a demand of Rs.27,280/- had been created by the CPC u/s 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, vide intimation dated 17.05.2017. Thereafter, the rectification u/s 154 of the Act was made at ‘Nil’ income on 28.09.2017. However, the demand stood still reflected at Rs.27,280/- in the AST System. This demand was due to error in the system, which, according to the assessee has been reduced to ‘Nil’. Therefore, the appeal has become infructuous and it is liable to be dismissed as such. Ordered accordingly. 7. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 18 th September,2023. Sd/- Sd/- व म !संह यादव आकाश द प जैन ( VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (AAKASH DEEP JAIN) लेखा सद'य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER उपा)य* / VICE PRESIDENT “Poonam” ITA 625/CHD/2022 A.Y.2016-17 4 आदेश क琉 灹ितिलिप अ灡ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ牸/ The Appellant 2. 灹瀄यथ牸/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु猴/ CIT 4. िवभागीय 灹ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च瀃डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड榁 फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar