9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (4) TMI 600 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance u/s 10(23C) (iiiad) - eligible for exemption u/s 11 not considered by CIT(A)- addition of corpus donations received by the appellant society by invoking section 115BBC by CIT(a) - assessment finalized u/s 144 by CIT confirmed and not u/s 143 (3) as contested by assessee - CIT(A)upholding the levy of interest u/s 234B - Held that - Bare perusal of the observations of the CIT (A) regarding the issues involved shows that indeed, the grievance of the assessee, taken by way of Ground No.5, to the effect that fair and proper opportunity of hearing was not granted to the assessee by the CIT (A), is found to be justified and is accepted as such. The Order under appeal has been passed without even adverting to the afore-quoted written submissions filed by the assessee before the CIT (A). Therefore, it would be in the interest of justice to remit this case to the file of the CIT (A), to be decided afresh, in accordance with law on affording due and adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee, no doubt, shall cooperate in the proceedings before the CIT (A) - appeal of the assessee allowed for statistical purposes.
Issues involved:
1. Disallowance under section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Income Tax Act 2. Eligibility for exemption under section 11 of the Income Tax Act 3. Addition of corpus donations under section 115BBC of the Income Tax Act 4. Levy of interest under section 234B of the Income Tax Act 5. Fair and proper opportunity of being heard during assessment Issue 1: Disallowance under section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Income Tax Act: The appellant contested the disallowance of Rs.1,19,723 under section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Income Tax Act. The appellant argued that the society's primary objective was education and that running an educational institution made it eligible for exemption. However, the Ld. CIT (A) found that the society did not exist solely for educational purposes based on the Memorandum of Association and expenditure incurred. The Ld. CIT (A) distinguished the case law cited by the appellant and upheld the denial of exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiad). Issue 2: Eligibility for exemption under section 11 of the Income Tax Act: The appellant also claimed that the income of Rs.1,19,723 should be eligible for exemption under section 11 of the Income Tax Act. However, the Ld. CIT (A) dismissed this claim as the society was found not to exist solely for educational purposes, which is a requirement for exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act. Issue 3: Addition of corpus donations under section 115BBC of the Income Tax Act: The addition of Rs.15,94,000 representing corpus donations received by the appellant society was contested. The appellant maintained that complete details of the donors were available but could not be filed during assessment due to procedural issues. The Ld. CIT (A) upheld the addition under section 115BBC(i) as the appellant failed to provide sufficient reasons or additional evidence for not submitting the details to the assessing officer. Issue 4: Levy of interest under section 234B of the Income Tax Act: The appellant challenged the levy of interest under section 234B, arguing that it should be based on the returned income, not the assessed income. However, the Ld. CIT (A) upheld the levy of interest under section 234B, stating that the case law cited by the appellant was not applicable to the circumstances of the case as the assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act. Issue 5: Fair and proper opportunity of being heard during assessment: The appellant raised concerns about not being granted a fair and proper opportunity of being heard during the assessment proceedings. The Ld. CIT (A) acknowledged this issue, noting that the order was passed without considering the written submissions filed by the appellant. As a result, the case was remitted back to the Ld. CIT (A) for a fresh decision, emphasizing the importance of providing due and adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. In conclusion, the appellate tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, highlighting the importance of ensuring a fair and proper opportunity of being heard during assessment proceedings as a fundamental aspect of natural justice.
|
