9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 607X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the Learned CIT(A) is bad both in the eye of law and on facts. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the action of CPC in not allowing assessee the benefit of accumulation u/s 11(2) of the Income Tax Act amounting to Rs. 34,73,760/-. 3. (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the action of CPC in upholding that the benefit of accumulation is not available to the assessee as it has not exercised its option before the due date of filing of return u/s 139(1) of the Act. (ii) That the assessee has in fact exercised the opti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctification under Sec.154 is rejected, for the following reasons (if any)" As seen from the Return of income filed, It is seen from the S.L. No 12(iv) of SCH. TI that Assessee has not exercised this option in writing before due date to the Assessing Officer for "Amount deemed to have been applied to charitable or religious purposes in India during the previous year as per clause (2) of Explanation to section 11(1)". Hence, Assessee is not eligible for this claim." 4. As against the order of the CPC, filed an appeal before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee vide order dated 08/03/2019 in following manners: "5.1.4. Section 154~provides or mistake apparent from record. In the case under1 considerati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed Form No. 10 and who is eligible for the deduction. It is the case of the assessee is that the assessee should have filed u/s 11(2) of the Act but due to punching mistake the assessee had claimed the deduction u/s 11(1) of the Act. it is not the case of the Revenue that the assessee is not eligible for the benefit for the deduction u/s 11 Sub Clause 2 of the Act. The only reason for rejecting the application filed by the assessee is that there is no error apparent from the record of the order passed by the CPC. 8. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pawan Kumar Agarwal Vs. CIT in ITA No. 199/2014 has held as under:- "6. Section 154 to the extent it is relevant is extracted below: - "Rectification of mistake. 154. [(1) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to amend the intimation under Section 143 (1) if the circumstances so warrant. We are wholly in agreement with the decision in Sam Global's matter (supra) that the technicalities in the given circumstances of the case ought not to obscure the justice. The justice demands, in the peculiar facts of the case, that there is no impediment to relief. That appears to have been overlooked in entirety by the lower authorities and the Tribunal had failed to notice that the controlling expression in Section 154 is not "an error" which is somewhat coloured by the exercise of power by the authorities. Instead, the controlling expression is "any mistake" which has wider connotation and includes mistakes committed by the parties also. 7. In view o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
