9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 1053X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1)(a) amounting to Rs. 43,98,666/- is a statutory claim of assessee. Thus, the exemption u/s 11(1)(a) is already claimed by assessee in original return, the only mistake which occurred was in mentioning the amount of second part of exemption. In any case, it is also a judicial view that a legal claim of assessee can be allowed by appellate authorities, if not by AO, and the decision of Goetze (India) Ltd. [ 2006 (3) TMI 75 - SUPREME COURT] does not come in the way of appellate authorities. Therefore, we are of the considered view that in present case the assessee s claim of exemption of Rs. 43,98,655/- under second part of the section 11(1)(a) has to be considered by AO. Accordingly, we direct the AO to allow the claim of assessee after ver ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15 per cent. Thus, the requirement of application of income of minimum 85 percent of total receipt to get an exemption u/s 11 has been fulfilled. 4. That the assessee has made a clerical error while filing the income tax return, the benefit of the exemption u/s 11 of the Act should not be denied merely on the basis of a clerical error on part of the assessee. 5. That there has been a genuine hardship on the assessee for denying the assessee of exemption u/s 11 merely on the basis of clerical error. 2. Heard the learned Representatives of both sides and case records perused. 3. It emerged during hearing that the assessee is a society registered by revenue u/s 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and hence eligible for exemption u/s 11/12. For AY ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f time for filing of revised return by then. But the impugned exemption of Rs. 43,98,666/- is a statutory claim available to assessee. Therefore, the same cannot be denied to assessee. Further, the non-claiming of exemption in the original return had happened as a consequence of auditor s mistake in Form No. 10B for which the assessee cannot be punished. Ld. AR submitted that the section 2(45) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 prescribes that the total income of assessee has to be computed according to the provisions of Income-tax Act, 1961 and therefore the impugned statutory exemption has to be allowed to assessee to arrive at correct total income in accordance with law. Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) has dismissed assessee s first-appeal by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 10B. There can hardly be any dispute by revenue that the impugned second part of exemption u/s 11(1)(a) amounting to Rs. 43,98,666/- is a statutory claim of assessee. Thus, the exemption u/s 11(1)(a) is already claimed by assessee in original return, the only mistake which occurred was in mentioning the amount of second part of exemption. In any case, it is also a judicial view that a legal claim of assessee can be allowed by appellate authorities, if not by AO, and the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in Goetze (India) Ltd. Vs. CIT (SC) does not come in the way of appellate authorities. Therefore, taking into account the facts of assessee s case in the light of provision of law and judicial view as narrated hereinbefore, we are of the co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
