9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 1098X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sment Year 2016-17 & 2017-18. 2. At the outset, we note that the order of the learned CIT-A was served upon the assessee dated 31 August 2020 but the appeals were presented before the Tribunal against the order of the learned CIT-A dated 30 December 2021 with the delay about 432 days in ITA Nos. 362-363/Ahd/2021 for AYs 2016-17 & 2017-18. It was explained by the learned AR that the appeals have been filed within the extended time as provided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the MA No. 665 of 221 Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, reported in [2022] 134 taxmann.com 307 (SC). Accordingly, the learned AR prayed for the admission of the appeal filed by the assessee. The learned DR has not controverted the prayer made by the learned AR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee falls within the limitation period extended by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as discussed above. Accordingly, we condone the delay happened in filing the appeals by the assessee and proceed to adjudicate the issue on merit. ITA No. 362/Ahd/2021 for A.Y. 2016-17 5. The only issue raised by the assessee is that the Ld. CIT(A), erred in confirming the intimation issued by the CPC, Bangalore by applying the maximum marginal rate of tax on the income which was below the taxable limit. 6. The necessary facts as emerged from the order of the authorities below are that the assessee in the present case is a trust and filed its return of income declaring an income of Rs. 1,62,360/- under the head "income from other sources". The assessee in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of Jain Sangh Parabdi Khayu Trustee (supra) involving the identical facts and circumstances have decided the issue in favour of the assessee. The relevant extract of the order is reproduced as under: 9. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. In the present case, the assessee being a trust was registered under Bombay Public Trust Act 1950. However the registration under section 12A of the Act was not available. Thus, there is no ambiguity to the fact that the benefit of the exemption as provided under section 11 of the Act shall not be available to the assessee. 9.1 The controversy arises for our adjudication whether the rate of an individual should be applied or the maxim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... total income of an association of persons and not at the maximum marginal rate." 9.3 It is the admitted position that the members of the trustees are not entitled to any share in the income of the Association of persons. Accordingly, we are of the view that the circular issued by the CBDT as discussed above is squarely applicable in the given facts and circumstances. Thus we hold that the rate applicable as to an individual for charging the income tax after a lowing the basic exemption limit, shall be applicable to the assessee on hand. Hence the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed. 9.4 In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed. 11.1. Before us, no material has been placed on record by the Revenue to demonstrate that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
