2025 (3) TMI 1117 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal Rules Rectification Application Under Section 154 Filed Timely, Orders Review by Assessing Officer for Fair Hearing.

Momin Medical Charitable Trust Versus Income Tax Officer (Exemption) Palanpur

The Tribunal addressed the issue of whether the rectification application filed by the assessee, a charitable trust, under Section 154 of the Income Tax ... Rectification application u/s.154 - assessee is a charitable trust registered u/s. 12AA, assessee filed its return of income showing gross receipt which were utilized towards the objects of the trust, assessee inadvertently claimed exemption u/s.10(23C) instead of Section 11 - HELD THAT:- No action has been taken by the AO as against the first rectification application filed by the assessee. When the second rectification application filed on 14.12.2022 the same also rejected on the ground of barred by limitation. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to set aside the matter back to the file of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to pass order on the rectification application dated 26.05.2016 filed by the assessee by giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDEREDThe primary issue considered in this judgment is whether the rectification application filed by the assessee under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was validly rejected on the grounds of being time-barred. The Tribunal also examined whether the assessee provided sufficient evidence to support the original rectification request filed within the permissible time frame.ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSISRelevant Legal Framework and PrecedentsThe legal framework revolves around Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which allows for rectification of mistakes apparent from the record. Subsection 7 of Section 154 prescribes a limitation period of four years from the end of the financial year in which the order sought to be rectified was passed. The Tribunal considered whether the application filed by the assessee on 26.05.2016 was within this limitation period and whether the subsequent application dated 14.12.2022 was rightly rejected as time-barred.Court's Interpretation and ReasoningThe Tribunal noted that the assessee, a charitable trust, inadvertently claimed exemption under Section 10(23C) instead of Section 11 in its return for Assessment Year 2014-15. The return was processed, and a tax demand was raised. The assessee filed a rectification application on 16.06.2016, which was not acted upon by the Assessing Officer (AO). A subsequent application filed on 14.12.2022 was rejected as time-barred under Section 154(7).The Tribunal focused on the evidence provided by the assessee, particularly the computer-generated acknowledgment receipt for the rectification application dated 26.05.2016. This evidence was crucial in establishing that the application was indeed filed within the permissible time frame.Key Evidence and FindingsThe Tribunal examined the computer-generated acknowledgment receipt, which included details such as the rectification reference number, order type, and rectification request type. This receipt was pivotal in demonstrating that the application was filed within the statutory period. The Tribunal found that the AO had failed to act on this application, leading to the subsequent rejection of the second application on grounds of limitation.Application of Law to FactsThe Tribunal applied the provisions of Section 154 and determined that the initial rectification application was filed within the four-year limitation period. The Tribunal concluded that the AO's inaction on the first application led to an unjust rejection of the second application based on time-barred grounds.Treatment of Competing ArgumentsThe Tribunal considered the arguments presented by the assessee regarding the filing and acknowledgment of the initial rectification application. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's argument that the application was filed within the statutory period, as evidenced by the acknowledgment receipt. The Tribunal did not find any competing arguments from the Revenue that could invalidate the evidence provided by the assessee.ConclusionsThe Tribunal concluded that the matter should be remanded to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to consider the rectification application dated 26.05.2016. The AO is directed to provide an opportunity for a hearing to the assessee and to pass an appropriate order on the rectification application.SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGSPreserve Verbatim Quotes of Crucial Legal ReasoningThe Tribunal stated, 'In the interest of justice, we deem it fit to set aside the matter back to the file of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to pass order on the rectification application dated 26.05.2016 filed by the assessee by giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee.'Core Principles EstablishedThe Tribunal established that when a rectification application is filed within the statutory period and acknowledged by the tax authorities, failure to act on such an application cannot be used to justify a subsequent rejection on grounds of limitation. The principle of fairness and justice mandates that the application be considered on its merits.Final Determinations on Each IssueThe Tribunal determined that the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, and the matter is remanded to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to pass an order on the rectification application dated 26.05.2016.