9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2025 (5) TMI 700X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... giving due regard to the circular no. 6/2020 dated 19.02.2020 and circular no. 173/193/2019-ITA-1 dated 23.04.2019 issued by the CBDT. 3. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) has completely ignored the judgments of Honourable Delhi and Surat Bench of ITAT and Honourable Bombay High Court referred by the appellant Council. 4. That the ld. CIT (Appeals) has acted against the principle of natural justice in not allowing proper opportunity of being heard to the appellant Council. 5. The appellant craves to add or alter any ground of appeal during or before the hearing of the case." 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee Rajasthan Nursing Council set up by the State Government was established under the Rajasthan Nursing, Midwives, Health Visitors and Auxiliary Nurse Midwives Registration Act No. 9 of 1964, published in the Rajasthan Gazette dated March 28, 1964, for the fulfillment of the aims and the objectives as laid down in the Act. The Council is directly governed by the State Government under the Department of Medical and Health. The Council is an educational institution undertaking activities mentioned in the Act, i.e. providing recognition to the institution, registration ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce with the provisions of section 13(9) of the Income Tax Act", hence, the exemption under section 11(2) was denied to the appellant Council. In this case, the due date referred for filing of ITR was not correct, as the ITR was filed within the time allowed under section 139(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. CBDT's Circular No. 6/2020 dated 19.02.2020 and Circular No. 173/193/2019-ITA-1 dated 23.04.2019 has clarified that for availing benefit of Section 11, the registered under section 12A shall file its return of income within time allowed under section 139. Section 139 includes belated return under section 139(4) and CBDT has directed that demand raised on this issue are to be rectified. Thus, the case of Council is covered by the Circular of CBDT. Further, the CIT (A) has erred inholding at page 7 of the order that the CIT (A) is not have the authority to condone the delay, while failing to take into account the binding circulars on the issue, where the circular itself direct the Ld CPC to rectify the demand issued in such cases, hence, the Ld. CIT (A) complete missed the intention of the circular that there was no requirement to condone the delay in filing of the Income Tax R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... time allowed under section 139. The NFAC/Ld. CIT (A) specifically held that Section 139 includes belated return under section 139(4) and CBDT has directed that demand raised on this issue are to be rectified. We find that ld. CIT (A) by following the mandates of aforesaid circulars allowed relief to the assessee on independent examination of facts of the case, we do not find any infirmity in the order of ld CIT (A), which we affirm." 3. In the case of Trustees of Tulsidas Gopalji vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (16 September, 1993), Honourable Bombay High Court [1994] 207 ITR 368 (Bom.) has held at para 9 of the order that " Applying the ratio of the above decision, the option exercised by the assessee under the Explanation to section 11(1) of the Act before the time allowed under sub-section (4) of section 139 has to be held to have been exercised before the time allowed under subsection (1) or sub-section (2) or section 139 of the Act and in that event, the assessee would be entitled to the benefit of deduction under section 11 of the Act." Further, as Form 10 was filed with the Income Tax Return which is within the due time, the benefit under section should have been provided ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... return of income subsequent to the insertion of Clause (ba) in sub-section 1 of section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Sir, Undersigned is directed to refer to the representation(s) received on above mentioned subject stating that while processing of ITR-7 for the A.Y. 2018-19, in respect of the belated returns filed under section 139(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act), the following is being communicated under section 143(l)(a) of the Act:- "As per section 12A(1)(ba) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 the person in receipt of the income has furnished the return of income for the previous year in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (4A) of section 139, within the time allowed under that section. Otherwise the exemption under section 11 i.e. sl.no. 4(i) and 4(viii) in schedule Part BTI is not allowed." Based on this, exemption under section 11 of the Act has been denied to otherwise eligible trust, thereby creating huge demand. 2. In the matter, the memorandum explaining the relevant provisions of the Finance Bill, 2017 reads as under: "as per the existing provisions of said section, the entities registered under section 12AA are required to file return of income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under section 139(1) of the IT Act, 1961. In this regard it is note-worthy that Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Trustees of Tulsidas Gopalji Charitable and Chaleshwar Temple Trust vs. CIT (1994) 207 ITR 368 (Bom.) while adjudicating the issue, has held that "On a careful reading of section 139 of the Act, we are of the clear opinion that sub-section (1) and (4) of section 139 have to be read together and on such a reading, the inevitable conclusion is that a return made within the time specified in sub-section (4) has to be considered as having been made within the time prescribed in sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 139 of the Act". We further find that CBDT in its Circular No. 6/2020 dated 19.02.2020 and Circular No. 173/193/2019-ITA-1 dated 23.04.2019 clarified that for availing benefit of Section 11, the registered under section 12AA shall file its return of income within time allowed under section 139. The NFAC/Ld. CIT (A) specifically held that Section 139 includes belated return under section 139(4) and CBDT has directed that demand raised on this issue are to be rectified. Thus, we are of the considered view that if the return is filed within the speci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
