2021 (3) TMI 834 - AT - Income Tax

Exemption u/s 11 denied - intimation was issued u/s. 143(1) rejecting the claim of the assessee u/s. 11 of the Act by the Central processing Center at Bangalore - typographical error was crept in while filing the return of income electronically, the assessee apparently typed as 10(23C)(vi) instead of Section 11 - HELD THAT - It is not in dispute that the assessee has referred the registration number of the Trust in the grounds of appeal before the ld. CIT(A). It is also not in dispute that right from the incorporation, the assessee trust was granted exemption up to AY 2016-17. It is also admitted fact that for AY 1983-84, the AO rejected the claim of the assessee for exemption u/s. 11 on the ground that assessee was carrying business activity. However, the ld. CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee. The order of the ld. CIT(A) was confirmed by this Tribunal and also by jurisdictional High Court. In view of the above facts and situation, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that merely because the copy of the registration certificate u/s.12A was not filed before the ld. CIT(A) that cannot be reason for rejecting the claim of the assessee u/s. 11 of the Act. Moreover, if the Department expects further material including the copy of the registration certificate the claim of the assessee cannot be rejected while processing the return u/s. 143(1). The Central Processing Center has also taxed the entire gross receipt of the assessee without allowing any expenditure. This cannot be done while processing the return u/s. 143(1) of the Act. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that Section 143(1) is meant for prima facie adjustment on the basis of material available on record without giving any opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, rejection of the claim of exemption u/s. 143(1) by Central Processing Center is not justified. AO is directed to grant exemption u/s.11 - Decided in favour of assessee

Summary

Issues:
Claim of exemption u/s. 11 of the Act rejected due to typographical error while filing return electronically.

Analysis:
The appellant, a trust established in 1964 and registered u/s 12A, filed a return claiming exemption u/s. 11 but erroneously typed as 10(23C)(iv). The Central Processing Center rejected the claim without inquiry, taxing the entire gross receipt. The CIT(A) upheld the rejection citing lack of registration certificate copy. The appellant argued that registration details were provided, and exemption was granted till AY 2016-17. The Tribunal noted the typographical error, previous exemptions, and lack of opportunity for the appellant to provide documents. The rejection was deemed unjustified, as Section 143(1) is for prima facie adjustments, not final decisions. The Tribunal set aside the lower authorities' orders, directing the Assessing Officer to grant exemption u/s. 11.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal allowed the appeal, emphasizing the importance of providing opportunities for submission of necessary documents and ensuring correct application of tax laws.