Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether penalty under section 272A(2)(e) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was sustainable for delayed filing of return by an educational institution claiming exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
Analysis: The assessee was a Government college whose income was exempt under section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and it had not filed returns earlier on the bona fide understanding that no such obligation existed. The amendment to section 139(4C) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 requiring filing of return by such institutions had escaped the assessee's attention. Once notice under section 148A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was issued, the assessee filed the return and the reassessment was completed at nil income after allowing full exemption. In these circumstances, the default was treated as a mere technical breach causing no loss to the revenue, amounting to substantial compliance rather than a contumacious lapse.
Conclusion: Penalty under section 272A(2)(e) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was held to be unjustified and was deleted in favour of the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an exempt educational institution's failure to file return stems from bona fide ignorance of an amended filing obligation and the return is subsequently filed with the assessment resulting in nil taxable income, penalty for delay may not be imposed if the lapse is only technical and revenue-neutral.