TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 201X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the 1961 Act, despite the fact that it never held registration u/s 12A at the relevant point of time. The assessee did not file revised return of income to claim exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) , rather originally the assessee filed belated return of income which infact could not have been revised u/s 139(5). The assessee set up claim for the first time for grant of exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) by filing rectification application u/s 154 of the 1961 Act. As held in Pr. CIT v. Wipro [ 2022 (7) TMI 560 - SUPREME COURT] that scope in filing revised return is to only correct omissions and errors , rather than bringing an altogether new claim in revised return of income. In the instant case before us, the assessee has not even filed revised return of income claiming exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) which infact the assessee could not have filed as originally the assessee filed belated return of income, rather this new claim of exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) was set up for the first time by assessee through rectification application u/s 154. The scope of Section 154 is very narrow and restricted to only correcting mistakes apparent from record, and in case if the claim of the assessee r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ribunal ) , reads as under:- 1. That in any view of the matter order passed under section 154 of the Act dated 22.09.2017 is bad both on the facts and in law and the assessing officer was wrong in denying genuine claim of the society. 2. That in any view of the matter the assessee society is engaged in carrying out educational activities as per rule and by-laws of the society and runs educational institution and claim exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act but both the two lower authorities failed to consider the genuine claim of the society which is highly unjustified. 3. That in any view of the matter the entire receipt of the assessee society were from fees collection which was duly accepted and no contrary view was taken by the department but allegation was about claim of expenditure which was as per by-laws of the society hence both the two lower authority failed to considered the fact that once receipts are accepted as genuine then there is no question of doubting expenditure claim which are part of the educational activity. 4. That in the any view of the matter both the two lower authorities failed to considered the genuine activities of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iiad) of the 1961 Act , income of any university or other educational institution existing solely for educational purposes is exempt from income-tax. The ld. CIT(A) observed that the assessee has incurred expenses towards Tree Plantation Programme and Women Welfare Programme which are not for educational purposes. The ld. CIT(A) held that the society is not existing solely for educational purposes as is required u/s 10(23C)(iiiad). The ld. CIT(A) observed that the assessee should run /establish educational institution for claiming exemption. Further, the ld. CIT(A) observed that as per income and expenditure account, the excess of income over expenditure was shown to the tune of Rs. 16,38,510/- as against, the total receipts of Rs. 22,48,800/- which clearly indicates that the assessee is profit making entity. The Ld. CIT(A) observed that Section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the 1961 Act provides exemption from income-tax to any university or other educational institution existing solely for educational purposes and not for purposes of profit , for claiming exemption under Section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act, and hence the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by Ld. CIT(A), vide appellate order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re-tribunal in the case of Rajiv Gandhi Proudyogiki Vishwavidalaya v. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru. On being asked by the Bench that for ay: 2011-12, there are no educational fee being credited in Income and Expenditure Account and while staff salary for the entire year is meager Rs. 72,000/- , it was submitted by ld. Counsel for the assessee that the educational institution was not started during this period and was under construction , and was on verge of starting the educational activities which infact were started in subsequent years, but it was claimed that the assessee society was existing for educational purposes, and hence the assessee is entitled for grant of deduction u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the 1961 Act. It was submitted that neither intimation u/s 143(1) was a speaking order, nor rectification order passed u/s 154 was a speaking order. 6. The ld. Sr. DR submitted that the Department has filed written submissions/paper book containing 46 pages, which should be taken on record. The said paper book is placed on record in file. The Learned Sr.DR submitted that the assessee never claimed exemption under Section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act in its return of income filed with the Depart ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome. The assessee claimed in the return of income filed with Department, that it is eligible for deduction u/s 11 and 12 of the 1961 Act. However, no particulars of Registration held by the assessee u/s 12A was furnished in the return of income filed with the department. This return filed by assessee itself is a belated return , which was not filed within due time as is prescribed u/s 139(4A) read with Section 139(1) of the 1961 Act. The assessee did not claim any exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the 1961 Act, while filing its return of income with department for ay: 2011-12. The return of income was processed by Revenue u/s 143(1) , vide orders dated 13.09.2013, wherein exemption claimed u/s 11 and 12 of the 1961 Act was denied to the assessee, since no particulars of registration u/s 12A held by the assessee was furnished . In-fact, registration u/s 12A was granted by the Department , vide orders dated 05th January , 2016 effective from 01st April 2015. No assessment for ay: 2011-12 was pending as on the date of grant of registration u/s 12A of the 1961 Act. The assessee filed rectification application u/s 154 of the 1961 Act , on 08th March, 2017 , wherein claim for exemption u/s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e did not file revised return of income to claim exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) , rather originally the assessee filed belated return of income which infact could not have been revised u/s 139(5). The assessee set up claim for the first time for grant of exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) by filing rectification application u/s 154 of the 1961 Act. The Hon ble Apex Court has held in Pr. CIT v. Wipro , reported in (2022) 140 taxmann.com 223(SC) , that scope in filing revised return is to only correct omissions and errors , rather than bringing an altogether new claim in revised return of income. In the instant case before us, the assessee has not even filed revised return of income claiming exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) which infact the assessee could not have filed as originally the assessee filed belated return of income, rather this new claim of exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) was set up for the first time by assessee through rectification application u/s 154. The scope of Section 154 of the 1961 Act is very narrow and restricted to only correcting mistakes apparent from record, and in case if the claim of the assessee requires long drawn deliberations and reasoning , it cannot be covered u/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ness of claim of deduction at the time of filing the return. If an assessee claims an exemption under the Act by virtue of Section 10B, then the correctness of claim has already been verified under section 10B (5). Therefore, if the claim is withdrawn post the date of filing of return, the accountant s report under section 10B (5) would become falsified and would stand to be nullified. Thus, Judged from any angle, the appeal of the assessee lacks merit , and is hereby dismissed. We order accordingly. 9. In the result appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no. 09/Alld/2021 for ay: 2011- 12 stands dismissed. 10. Now, we shall take up appeal filed by assessee in ITA No. 10/Alld/2021 for ay: 2013-14 with tribunal. The grounds of appeal raised by assessee in Memo of Appeal filed with tribunal, reads as under: 1. That in any view of the matter order passed under section 154 of the Act dated 22.09.2017 is bad both on the facts and in law and the assessing officer was wrong in denying genuine claim of the society. 2. That in any view of the matter the assessee society is engaged in carrying out educational activities as per rule and by-laws of the society and runs educa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
