Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad Gram Uthan … v. …
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, AT CUTTACK ITA No. 49 of 2023 Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad Gram Uthan ….. Vs. ….. Appellant Mr. S.C. Mohanty, Sr. Standing Counsel, Income Tax Department Respondent
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Sunil Mishra, Adv. CORAM: DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI MR. JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY
Decision
ORDER 14.05.2024 Order No. 02. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard Mr. S.C. Mohanty, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue and Mr. Sunil Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent. 3. Mr. S.C. Mohanty, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue states that he has complied with the order dated 15.04.2024 passed by this Court by filing certified copies of orders impugned. The same be kept on record. 4. The appellant has filed this appeal seeking to set aside the order dated 19.01.2023 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in ITA No. 12/CTK/2022 for the Assessment year 2018-19 under the Income Tax Act, 1961 and further seeks to decide the question of law as referred in paragraph-13 (i) and (ii) of the appeal in favour of the appellant. 5. Mr. S.C. Mohanty, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue contended that there is mistake on the part of the assessee by giving wrong date. It is contended that when the assessee Page 1 of 4 asked for rectification of the mistake, the same was denied and, as such, the same was also confirmed in appeal. But the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal held that the mistake can be rectified and, as such, direction issued to the Assessing Authority to pass necessary rectification order, which is arbitrary exercise of power. It is further contended that the question of law, as referred in paragraph-13(i) and (ii) has to be decided wherein it has been stated that whether the ITAT is justified in allowing the appeal of the assessee ignoring the fact that the assessee has neither claimed relief under Section 12AA in its original return of income filed on 26.10.2018 nor claims the same in any revised return required to be filed any time before the end of the relevant assessment year or before the completion of assessment, whichever is earlier as prescribed under Section 139 (5) of the I.T. Act, 1961, and whether the ITAT is correct in allowing the claim of the assessee ignoring the fact that the assessment in the case under Section 143 (1) of the I.T. Act was completed on 17.10.2019, whereas the revised return was filed on 07.03.2022, which is beyond the allowed time. 6. Mr. Sunil Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent vehemently contended that the questions which have been formulated cannot be construed to be the questions of law to be adjudicated by this Court and more so the present appeal is no more survive in view of the fact that the order passed by the tribunal has already been implemented and on that basis the assessee has also sought for refund of the amount and the same was refunded. So far as interest part is concerned, the assessee had approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.3067 of 2024, which was disposed of vide order dated 04.03.2024. Therefore, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the present appeal. It is contended that the wrong date which has been mentioned by the respondent though the same denied by the Assessing Authority and also the 1st appellate Page 2 of 4 authority and second appellate authority to rectify the same under law, but the tribunal directed that the same should be rectified. Thereby, no illegality or irregularity has been committed by the tribunal so as to cause interference with same and, as such, the appeal has become infructuous because of the implementation of the order passed by the tribunal. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, more particularly ITR-7, copy of which has been filed, this Court finds that personal information in Part-A General, clearly uses the word date of formation/incorporation, which really mean the date of formation of the trust that the revenue required the date of registration under Section 12A of the Act is not specifically mentioned there. Therefore, it can be construed to be a mistake, but it cannot be construed to be a deliberate and willful laches on the part of the respondent. Thereby, it was also recognized that in the returned file, the assessee has claimed the exemptions under Sections 11 and 12 of the Act in the computation of the income filed along with the return. The exemptions have been claimed, the requisite Form 10B along with the audit report as required to be filed by charitable institution has also been filed. Thereby, merely because of wrong mentioning of the date, which is a mistake apparent from the record and, as such, the same is rectifiable under Section 154 of the Act, which has been refused by the Assessing Authority and confirmed in appeal, is absolutely erroneous approach on the part of the authority. Thereby, the tribunal while entertaining the appeal has directed that the mistake can be rectified under Section 154 of the Act by treating the said error in mentioning of the date of registration under Section 12A as a mistake apparent from the record. Therefore, no illegality or irregularity has been committed by the tribunal in passing the order impugned and, as such, no question Page 3 of 4 of law is to be considered in the present appeal, as the order passed by the tribunal has already been implemented by refunding the amount to the assessee and as such claiming interest the assessee had also approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No. 3067 of 2024, which was disposed of vide order dated 04.03.2024. Therefore, the present appeal does not stand to scrutiny of this Court. 8. In the result, the appeal merits no consideration and the same is hereby dismissed. (DR. B.R. SARANGI) JUDGE Ashok (G. SATAPATHY) JUDGE Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR JAGADEB MOHAPATRA Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA Date: 15-May-2024 14:40:08 Page 4 of 4