Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (10) TMI 386 - AT - Income TaxExemption u/s 11 - Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - whether jurisdiction was vested on the ld. CIT(E) and not with the Territorial Commissioner? - trust has claimed the exemption under section 11 & 12 in the return after filing the application of registration u/s 12AA - Whether assessment beyond jurisdiction and the assessment orders are nonest ? - assessee computed capital gain tax by ascertaining the cost of acquisition on basis of the valuation of property through registered valuer - HELD THAT:- Jurisdiction point is explained in this way that the territorial jurisdiction is overruled by the concurrent jurisdiction which is covered by the said notification of the CBDT. Furthermore, the registration U/s 12AA is in action from the year of application. So, the year of application is considered as deemed registration and the claim of deduction u/s 11 and 12 should be applicable accordingly. Accordingly, the assessing authority had acted beyond jurisdiction. The grounds of related to the jurisdictional issue are in favour of the assessee. Applicability of section 11(1A) of the Act and exemption of capital gain arising out of compulsory acquisition of assessee’s land - In adjudication of valuation of cost of acquisition it is very clear that a land was purchased before 01.04.1981. The base rate of index is started from 01.04.1981 as per the Act. The valuation of the property should not be the same on the date of acquisition beyond 01.04.1981 & on the date 01/04/1981. We relied in the judgment Govindaraju vs. ITO Ward 8-(2) Bangalore [2015 (8) TMI 271 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] Where assessee determined fair market value of property according to valuation report of a registered valuer, Assessing Officer could not have arrived at 'fair market value' of property ignoring valuation report on record. So, the report drawn by the Government Valuer is very much accepted. Mr. Sehgal also mentioned that both the revenue authorities did not take contingence of any other valuation report from any of the authority. So, this particular report is accepted. As the benefit of section 12A is applicable in both the years. Mr. Sehgal specially mentioned the judgment in the case of Prem Prakash Mandal vs. ITO [2021 (8) TMI 744 - ITAT RAIPUR] with following observation: Where assessee-trust, engaged in social and religious activities, was denied exemption under section 11 on ground of non-registration under section 12A, however, during pendency of appeal filed by assessee before CIT (A) against same, assessee obtained registration under section 12A, assessee’s case would be covered under deemed registration and, thus, assessee would be entitled to claim exemption under section 11. Assessee appeal allowed.
|