2022 (3) TMI 1194 - AT - Income Tax

Exemption u/s 11(2) - whether the AO/Ld. CIT(A) have erred in not granting the exemption under section 11(2) of the Act despite satisfying the conditions by the assessee as laid down under section 11(2) of the Act while processing the return of the income under section 143(1)? - HELD THAT - When the assessee has submitted form No.10 within time in compliance to Rule 17, the AO has erred in denying the benefits claimed by the assessee under section 11(2) of the Act. At the same time, the Ld. CIT(A) has also erred in dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee challenging the order under section 154 of the Act passed by the AO. It is also brought to the notice of the Bench by the assessee that for the earlier years AO allowed such rectification application vide order dated 25.02.2020. In these circumstances, Revenue Authorities were required to follow the rule of consistency instead of generating unnecessary litigation. We are of the considered view that rectification application filed by the assessee before the AO and the appeal filed before the Ld. CIT(A) were liable to be allowed. Hence appeal filed by the assessee is accepted and AO is directed to rectify the order by allowing the claim admissible to the assessee under section 11(2) of the Act after due verification of the facts claimed by the assessee.

Summary

Issues involved:
- Denial of exemption u/s 11(2) of ?13,20,72,198
- Allegation of not exercising the option u/s 11(2)
- Dismissal of appeal without considering eligibility for exemption u/s 11(2)
- Compliance with necessary conditions for deductions under section 11(2)
- Dispute over physical filing of form No.10 for accumulation

Analysis:

Issue 1: Denial of exemption u/s 11(2) of ?13,20,72,198
The appellant, a trust registered under section 12A of the Income Tax Act, filed for exemption u/s 11(2) but the Assessing Officer (AO) did not allow the deduction despite the physical filing of form No.10. The AO processed the return under section 143(1) without granting the claimed exemption. The Tribunal found that the denial was unfounded as the necessary conditions were met by the assessee, leading to the conclusion that the AO erred in not granting the exemption.

Issue 2: Allegation of not exercising the option u/s 11(2)
The appellant contended that the option u/s 11(2) was exercised within the prescribed time and submitted to the AO. The AO's conclusion that the option was not exercised was challenged. The Tribunal noted that the option was indeed exercised timely, as evidenced by the submission to the AO. This highlighted an error in the AO's assessment, supporting the appellant's position.

Issue 3: Dismissal of appeal without considering eligibility for exemption u/s 11(2)
The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without appreciating the appellant's eligibility for claiming the exemption u/s 11(2), causing genuine hardship. The Tribunal found this dismissal unjustified, especially when the appellant had complied with the necessary conditions for the deductions. The dismissal was deemed erroneous, leading to the Tribunal's decision to allow the appeal.

Issue 4: Compliance with necessary conditions for deductions under section 11(2)
The Tribunal emphasized that the appellant had filed the return as a trust registered under section 12A, claiming deductions under section 11(2) with necessary compliance. Despite the physical submission of form No.10 for accumulation, the AO did not allow the deduction, which was found to be an error. The Tribunal's analysis focused on the proper fulfillment of conditions by the appellant.

Issue 5: Dispute over physical filing of form No.10 for accumulation
The Tribunal addressed the dispute regarding the physical filing of form No.10 for accumulation, emphasizing that the appellant had submitted the form within the required timeframe. The denial of benefits by the AO was deemed incorrect, especially when the physical submission was acknowledged by the AO. The Tribunal's decision to allow the rectification application and direct the AO to rectify the order in favor of the appellant highlighted the importance of proper compliance and adherence to rules.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the AO to rectify the order by granting the claim admissible to the appellant under section 11(2) of the Act. The judgment emphasized the importance of following rules and ensuring proper verification of facts to avoid unnecessary litigation and uphold consistency in decision-making by Revenue Authorities.