2022 (4) TMI 448 - AT - Income Tax

Exemption u/s 11 - As per AO assessee has been claiming exemption u/s.10(23C) in the earlier years and during the year under consideration the assessee had got registration u/s. 12A - CPC rejected the claim of the assessee u/s.10(23C) by holding that the assessee had not obtained necessary approval from the prescribed authority and the receipts of the assessee exceeded ₹ 1.00 crore. The application for rectification u/s.154 was also rejected - HELD THAT - Nowhere in the appellate order the ld. CIT(A) disputed the fact that assessee was not registered u/s.12A of the Act. The registration certificate granted by the department on 2.9.2014 is on record. Further the uploading of Form-10B which is a audit report u/s.12A(b) of the Act, proves that the mistake committed by assessee in claiming exemption u/s.10(23C) is inadvertent mistake as by committing such a mistake the assessee is not going to gain anything. Fact of the matter is that assessee is registered u/s.12A of the Act and is eligible for exemption u/s.11 of the Act. Therefore for inadvertent mistake the assessee cannot be penalized. Since the assessee has been claiming exemption u/s.10(23C) in the earlier years therefore during the year under consideration there is high probability that assessee again claimed exemption u/s.10(23C) by overlooking the fact that it had already got registration u/s.12A of the Act which in any case was available with the assessee before the filing of return of income. The mistake has occurred as a human error and should have been judicially considered - we direct the Assessing Officer to allow the exemption to the assessee u/s.12A of the Act in accordance with law - Decided in favour of assessee.

Issues:
1. Claim of exemption under section 12A of the Act.
2. Mistake in filing return of income.
3. Denial of exemption under section 11 and 12 of the Act.
4. Rectification application under section 154.
5. Rejection of claim under section 10(23C).
6. Allowance of fresh claim before appellate authorities.
7. Legality of the CIT(A)'s order.

Analysis:

1. Claim of exemption under section 12A of the Act:
The appellant appealed against the order of the ld. CIT(A) regarding the rejection of the claim of exemption under section 12A of the Act. The appellant had mistakenly claimed exemption under section 10(23C) instead of section 12A, despite having obtained registration under section 12A. The Tribunal found that the mistake was inadvertent, as evidenced by the registration certificate and the audit report uploaded by the appellant. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to allow the exemption under section 12A in accordance with the law.

2. Mistake in filing return of income:
The appellant argued that the mistake in claiming exemption under the wrong section was due to a clerical error while filing the return of income. The appellant had filed a rectification application under section 154, which was rejected. The Tribunal acknowledged the mistake as a human error and emphasized that the appellant should not be penalized for the inadvertent mistake.

3. Denial of exemption under section 11 and 12 of the Act:
The ld. CIT(A) denied the appellant's claim for exemption under sections 11 and 12 of the Act, citing the difference between the claim of exemption under section 10(23C) and sections 11 and 12. However, the Tribunal noted that the appellant was registered under section 12A and eligible for exemption under section 11 of the Act. The Tribunal emphasized that the appellant should not be penalized for the mistake and directed the Assessing Officer to allow the exemption.

4. Rectification application under section 154:
The appellant's rectification application under section 154 was rejected by the CPC, leading to an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The Tribunal considered the rejection of the rectification application and emphasized that the mistake in claiming exemption under the wrong section was inadvertent and should have been judicially considered.

5. Rejection of claim under section 10(23C):
The CPC rejected the appellant's claim under section 10(23C) due to the failure to obtain necessary approval and exceeding the prescribed threshold of receipt. The Tribunal found that the appellant had mistakenly claimed exemption under section 10(23C) instead of section 12A, despite being registered under section 12A. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to allow the exemption under section 12A.

6. Allowance of fresh claim before appellate authorities:
The Tribunal recognized the appellant's right to make a fresh claim before the appellate authorities, emphasizing that the mistake in claiming exemption under the wrong section should not penalize the appellant. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to allow the exemption under section 12A in accordance with the law.

7. Legality of the CIT(A)'s order:
The Tribunal found that the ld. CIT(A) had erred in rejecting the appellant's claim for exemption under section 12A, despite the appellant being registered under that section. The Tribunal emphasized that the mistake in claiming exemption under the wrong section was inadvertent and directed the Assessing Officer to allow the exemption under section 12A.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the appellant and directed the Assessing Officer to grant the exemption under section 12A of the Act.

← Previous Next →