9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 1534X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent Year 2019-20 and another recovery letter dated 24.05.2024 for Assessment years 2018-19 and 2019-20 was received from the DCIT (Exemption), Chandigarh for the pending demand that the assessee confronted this fact to their C.A., D.P. Singh with the factual issues and then he hurriedly filed the appeal for both the years and thereafter, his services was terminated and new Counsel was engaged and all this happened because of the fact that the accounts branch and Comptroller office were not having any knowledge of the Income Tax matters and were solely dependent upon the C.A., D.P. Singh and the assessee had placed before us in Paper Book, documentary evidence of the various emails, letters and other correspondence with the C.A., D.P. Singh and C.A., D.P. Singh had confirmed to them that the appeals are pending and the matter is being resolved and which fact the assessee became aware only when the recovery notices were received for the first time from the office of the DCIT (Exemption) Chandigarh. 4. The assessee also relied upon the judgments of various Courts in which, following the judgment of the Apex Court, it has been held that the delay should be condoned where the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... athpur Nafar Academy and Others' in Civil Appeals Nos. . 8183-8184 of 2013 order dated 13.09.2013, wherein, it has been held as under: The expression "sufficient cause" employed by the legislature is adequately elastic to enable the courts to apply the law in a meaningful manner which sub serves the ends of justice, for that is the life-purpose for the existence of the institution of courts. The learned Judges emphasized on adoption of a liberal approach while dealing with the applications for condonation of delay as ordinary a litigant does not stand*to benefit by lodging an appellate and refusal to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and the cause of justice being defeated." 8. Keeping in view of the above said facts and the case laws as discussed above, the delay of 691 days and 706 days in both the Assessment years i.e., 2018-19 & 2019-20 are condoned. 9. On the merits of the addition, the Assessee has taken following grounds of appeal in assessment year 2018-19: 1. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee and disallowing the benefit of exemption as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee is entitled to claim the exemption u/s 10(23C) (iiiab) but then he upheld the disallowance as made u/s 143(3) and 143(1) even though in the last line of the order, he mentioned that the appeal is allowed. 12. The ld. Counsel of the assessee argued vehemently that it is just a bonafide error on the part of the counsel of the assessee who did not mention correct section/sub-clause for the purpose of claiming the exemption which the assessee is otherwise entitled to and relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Heidrick and Struggles Inc. as reported in [2024] 461 ITR 33 in which after relying upon the Circular of CBDT No. 19 of 1955 wherein, it has been held that in the matter of claiming and securing relief, the officers of the department should take the initiative in guiding the taxpayer for claiming relief wherever it is due even if, the assessee may have inadvertently omitted to claim the same have been in the return of income. The assessee also relied upon the Judgment of the Hon'ble Chandigarh Bench of ITAT in the case of Habrol Cooperative Agricultural Services Society in ITA No. 158/Chd/2024 (Chd. Trib.) in which simil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imed or claimed under wrong sections. Accordingly, we do not find any justification in the findings given by the Addl/JCIT (A) and so it cannot be sustained, thus Assessee's appeal on this issue is allowed. 17. Thus, following the above said judgment, the assessee's appeal for claim of deduction u/s 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 stands allowed. ITA No. 492/Chd/2024: ( A.Y. 2019-2020) 18. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal for assessment year 2019-20: 1. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee and disallowing the benefit of exemption as claimed by the assessee to the tune of Rs. 5,30,26,31,567/- 2. That the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi having admitted the fact that the assessee is entitled to exemption u/s 10(23C) (iii ab) but due to wrong mentioning of the section by the CA, D.P. Singh, while filing the return of the assessee and the same should not have disallowed. 3. That the Ld. CIT (A) having accepted that the assessee is covered under the ambit of section 10(23C) (iii ab) but only on the basis of mistake of the counsel in filling the correct section wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... p;530.26 crore receipts and thus, it is a substantially financed university and for substantially financed university there is no requirement of audit as per tenth proviso which specifically excludes conducting of audit/report u/s 44AB and the report of such audit in prescribed form if the claim of the exemption falls u/s 10(23)(iiiab). 21. We have gone through the facts and the arguments as advanced by both the parties and though the facts & circumstances are the same as in appeal for AY 2018-19 and we have also gone through the observation of the ld. CIT (A) at page 9 of the order and also gone through the arguments of the Ld. Counsel wherein, he has pointed out that the said audit report as mentioned supra is not applicable where the claim of assessee is entitled to the exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiab) and it was only when it was inadvertent mistake on the part of the then counsel CA, DP Singh that wrong section was mentioned for claiming the exemption while filing the return of income and thus, after going through the relevant proviso as pointed out by the Ld. Counsel, we hold that the said condition of the audit report u/s 44AB and 12A registration is not required to the universi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
