TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 1019X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sidering the totality of the facts, we find no reason to interfere with the order of CIT(A) and thus the ground of Revenue is dismissed. - ITA No. 6780/Del/2018 - - - Dated:- 23-2-2023 - Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Accountant Member And Sh. Yogesh Kumar Us, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri V. K. Bindal, C.A., Ms. Rinky Sharma, ITP For the Revenue : Shri Rajendra Jha, Sr. D.R. ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM : This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 17.08.2018 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-40, Delhi relating to Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. Brief facts of the case as culled out from the material on record are as under :- 3. Assessee is a charitable society is inter alia stated to be engaged in promotion, protection and advancement of women and girls. It is stated to be registered with Registrar of Society and holds registration u/s 12A of the Act. Assessee had electronically filed its return of income on 30.09.2008 for A.Y. 2008-09 declaring Nil income after claiming exemption u/s 11 12 of the Act. The return of income was initially processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. AO has noted that in A.Y. 2007-08, assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... count of advance given for purchase of property in A.Y. 2007-08 but in A.Y. 2008-09 when the amount of advance was received back as no property was purchased, the amount received back was not considered as income in the original return of income that was filed by assessee. It is the submissions of the Learned DR that assessee had not included Rs.5,85,00,000/- in the original return of income filed u/s 139 of the Act and only when the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 148 of the Act, the assessee had shown the amount as income which assessee had claimed it as accumulation u/s 11(2) of the Act. He further submitted that assessee had neither passed a resolution before the due date of filing of return nor the details of accumulations of funds was mentioned in the audit report and only when the case of the assessee was reopened, assessee had passed a resolution to accumulate the funds for five years u/s 11(2) of the Act. He submitted that since the proceedings u/s 147 of the Act are for the benefit of revenue and not for the assessee, the assessee cannot be permitted to convert the reassessment proceedings and cannot seek relief in respect of items which are not claimed in the origi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssment years 1998-99, 1999-2000, 2000-01 the said Form-10 has been furnished during the course of re-assessment proceedings pursuant to proceedings initiated under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the said Rules). 2. It is an admitted position, in view of several decisions of the Courts including the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Nagpur Hotel Owners Association [2001] 247 ITR 201/114 Taxman 255, that the said Form-10 could be furnished by the assessee up to the stage of completion of the assessment under Section 143(3) of the said Act. The only point in issue in the present case is whether the Form-10 could be furnished by the assessee for the purposes of Section 11 of the said Act during the re- assessment proceedings. 3. The learned counsel for the revenue contended that Form-10 could be produced by the assessee only up to the completion of the original assessment proceedings under Section 143(3). He submitted that the re- assessment proceedings are for the benefit of the revenue and the assessee cannot take advantage of the same. Therefore, in the course of re- assessment proceedings the assessee would not be ent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rement of the Act will have to be any time before the assessment proceedings, Further, any claim for giving the benefit of section 11 on the basis of information supplied subsequent to the completion of assessment would mean that the assessment order will have to be reopened. In our opinion, the Act does not contemplate such re- opening of the assessment. In the case in hand it is evident from the records of the case that the respondent did not furnish the required information till after the assessments for the relevant years were completed. In the light of the above, we are of the opinion that the stand of the Revenue that the High Court erred in answering the first question in favour of the assessee is correct, and we reverse that finding and answer the said question in the negative and against the assessee. In view of our answer to the first question, we agree with Mr. Verma that it is not necessary to answer the second question on the facts of this case. On going through the above extract we find that the Supreme Court observed that it was necessary that the assessing authority must have the information under Form-10 at the time he completes the assessment and in its abse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
