9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 834X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A of the Act vide registration No. 2755/70 w.e.f. the date of its establishment. The assessee is filing return of income regularly claiming exemption u/s. 11 of the Act and right from its establishment the income tax authorities are allowing exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. For the AY 1984-85, the claim of the assessee for exemption u/s. 11 of the Act was rejected by the Assessing Officer on the ground that the assessee was doing business. However, on appeal by the assessee the ld. CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee on the ground that the trust is a public charitable trust. The Revenue filed an appeal before this Tribunal in ITA No. 66/Jab/1989. This Tribunal by an order dated 18.02.1993 confirmed the order of the CIT(A) in which the exe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he ld. CIT(A) that exemption was granted till the AY 2016-17 from the date of its incorporation and for the AY 1983-84 even the High Court allowed the exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. 5. According to ld. Representative for the assessee, it is the intimation issued u/s. 143(1) of the Act for prima facie adjustment. If the department wants copy of the registration certificate, then it cannot be done in the prima facie adjustment u/s. 143(1) and opportunities shall be given to the assessee to furnish whatever documents the Department expects from the assessee. The CIT(A) is not justified in confirming the intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Act by the Central Processing Center at Bangalore. 6. On the contrary, Shri I.B. Khandel, ld. Departmental Repr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssing Officer. Moreover, when the intimation was issued u/s. 143(1) of the Act by making a prima facie adjustment how can the matter can be remanded back to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration, the ld. Departmental Representative could not give any proper explanation. 7. Having heard the ld. Representative for the assessee and ld. Departmental Representative, this Tribunal have meticulously gone through the material on record. Admittedly, the intimation was issued u/s. 143(1) of the Act rejecting the claim of the assessee u/s. 11 of the Act by the Central processing Center at Bangalore. A typographical error was crept in while filing the return of income electronically, the assessee apparently typed as 10(23C)(vi) instead of Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
