Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (7) TMI 1135 - AT - Income TaxExemption u/s 11 - Trust is registered u/s. 12A - HELD THAT:- Appellant is holding Registration u/s. 12A of IT. Act 1961 and no violation of any of the provisions of section 13 is alleged in the assessment order. In view of there being application of income at more than 85% of receipts of trust no income is exigible to tax at the hands of appellant. In view of above it held that trust is assessable entity and income of trust is to be assessed/determined at the hands of appellant itself. Income of appellant is determined at Rs. NIL as shown in the return considering provisions of section 11 - Order of CIT(A) is reversed/modified in terms of discussion made hereinabove. Grounds of appeal of appellant are allowed. Revision u/s 263 - income assessed in the case of appellant assessment framed is on protective basis and income computed is assessed on substantive basis in the case of Shri Vasantrao Ghonge by same A.O. - HELD THAT:- The income assessed on substantive basis at the hands of Late Shri Vasantrao Ghonge is after deducting the expenditure incurred and shown in Income and expenditure account of trust from the gross receipts. CIT Central has found no fault with allowability of same expenditure in the case of Shri Vasantrao Ghonge where income has been determined on substantive basis even though case of Shri Vasantrao Ghonge was under his charge. It is also noted that the income determined on substantive basis in the case of Shri Vasantrao Ghonge has been settled under Vivad se Vishwas Scheme by Shri Vasantrao Ghonge for Asstt. Years 2009-10 and 2010-11 and form No. 5 has been issued in the case of Shri Vasantrao Ghonge for Asstt. Years 2009-10 and 2010-11 on 25/11/2020 which is placed on record. The CBDT Circular No. 7 dated 04/03/2020 issued clarification on provisions of Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Bill 2020, Answer to Question No. 35 it has been clarified that on settlement of dispute relate to substantive addition A.O. shall pass rectification order deleting protective addition. In view of discussion made hereinabove the order passed by A.O. in no manner of consideration can be considered as erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of revenue. The order passed by A.O. not being erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of revenue Learned CIT Central ought not to have set aside the assessment framed u/s. 143 r.w.s. 153C in case of appellant by his order u/s. 263 - We are of the view that order passed u/s. 263 is bad in law.
|