2023 (2) TMI 151 - AT - Income Tax

Exemption u/s 11 - charitable purpose was shown under the category of advancement of any other object of general public utility and the entire receipts were shown from such activity - Before us, as pleaded that the assessee has wrongly filled the column A(i) pertaining to Other details the ITR7 and since CPC is a automated process, the adjustment has also been wrongly made - HELD THAT - Having gone through the entire factum of the case, we hold that a right tax has to be collected from the right person and though the CPC has processed the return based on the information given by the assessee, and when the information given by the assessee itself is incorrect in filling of the relevant column, the same needs to be allowed to be rectified in the interest of justice. Hence, the matter is remanded back to the file of the JAO to consider the earlier return and subsequent return filed by the assessee and the mistake in filling the column no. A(i) be rectified. Appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Appeal against order of CIT(A) sustaining disallowances made under section 143(1) - Incorrect claim of deductions, exemptions, relief - Disallowances made without mentioning reasons in intimation - Claim for exemption under section 11 - Processing under section 143(1) by CPC - Disallowance based on inconsistency in information provided - Interpretation of section 2(15) regarding charitable purpose - Discrepancy in receipts from business activities exceeding Rs. 25 lakhs - Legal provisions governing adjustments under section 143(1) - Need for rectification of incorrect information in return.

Analysis:
The appellant filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) sustaining disallowances made under section 143(1) of various deductions and exemptions amounting to Rs. 77,23,693. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowances due to inconsistencies in the information provided by the assessee in the return of income. The return declared income at nil after claiming exemption under section 11, with significant amounts claimed under different categories. The CPC, during processing under section 143(1), computed a tax liability of Rs. 28,49,284, disallowing the exemption under section 11. The CIT(A) referred to section 2(15) to determine that if receipts from business activities exceed Rs. 25 lakhs, the advancement of any other object of general public utility shall not be considered a charitable purpose.

The CIT(A) relied on legal provisions and precedents to support the disallowance based on the inconsistency in the information provided by the assessee. The appellant argued that the incorrect information in the return was a result of wrongly filling a specific column, and if noticed, it would have been rectified. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of collecting the right tax from the right person and directed the matter to be remanded to rectify the mistake in filling the column A(i) in the return. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, highlighting the need for rectification in the interest of justice.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision focused on rectifying the incorrect information provided in the return to ensure the proper collection of taxes. The judgment highlighted the significance of accurate information in tax filings and the need for adjustments to be made based on correct and consistent details. The case underscored the importance of adhering to legal provisions and ensuring that claims for exemptions align with statutory requirements to avoid disallowances during processing under section 143(1).