TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (1) TMI 130
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1961?" 2. The brief facts out of which the present appeal has arisen are as under:- 3. The asseessee filed Income Tax return in this case on 27.3.1997 showing his income as Nil. While processing the return under Section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act (for short the 'Act'), the Assessing Officer found that the claim of the assessee for exemption under Section 12-A of the Act was not allowable in the absence of registration certificate. A notice dated 12.3.1998 (Annexure A-1) was issued to the assessee requiring him to explain why the status of the said trust may not be treated as AOP in the absence of the registration certificate. On the required date neither any reply was received nor anybody attended the proceedings before the AO on behalf of the assessee. Hence, the AO proceeded with the computation of total income under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act and treated the status of the trust as AOP and all the income for the assessment year was treated as AOP and was taxed accordingly. The Assessing Officer changed the status of the assessee from trust (08) claimed in the return to an AOP (07) while processing the return under Section 143(1)(a). 4. Aggrieved with this ac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....000 allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the CIT(A) and quashed the intimation sent by the AO under Section 143(1)(a) on the ground that the same was illegal and bad in law. While passing the impugned order dated 18.5.2007 the tribunal held that changing the status of the firm/trust to an AOP falls outside the ambit and purview of Section 143(1)(a) . Even though the trust was not registered with the CIT the assessment could not be made in the status of an AOP under Section 143(1)(a). Moreover, the AO could have done so by issuance of notice under Section 143(2) of the Act. 6. Mr. Yogesh Putney, counsel for the revenue has argued that admittedly the respondent-trust was not registered with the Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act therefore, was not entitled to the exemption as claimed under Section 11 of the Act and further the assessee failed to furnish any explanation/reply to the letter dated 12.3.1998 written by the AO to him allowing him an opportunity to explain why the status of the trust may not be taken as AOP in the absence of registration. Therefore, the trust/assessee was rightly treated as an AOP at the time of processing the r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tax Officer, in such a case, is that he can require the assessee to furnish proof in which case he will presumably have to issue notice under section 143(2). This is also evident from the fact that, except for the documents specified, the assessee is not required to file the entire books of account or other documents along with the return. The proof in support of the claim may be evidenced from correspondence, from the books of account or other documents and it is not the law, as we understand it, that, in support of a claim made in the return for deduction or non-taxability of a receipt, all the proofs available and original documents must be filed along with the return. It is apparent on a reading of the said provision that adjustment can be made only if there is information available in such return that prima facie a claim or allowance is inadmissible. 9. The same view was taken by the Delhi High Court in the case of Samtel Color Ltd. vs. Union of India (2002) 258 ITR 1 and it was held as under( head note) :- "A bare reading of section 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, makes it clear that if, on the basis of the return filed by the assessee, any tax or interest is fou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng inadmissible deductions and allowances. No prejudice will be caused to the Revenue. In a given case where the Assessing Officer has any doubt about the allowability of deduction or claim made by the assessee, it is open to him to issue a notice under sub-section (2) of section 143 and have the evidence in support thereof. 10. The Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. K.V. Mankaram & Co., (2000) 245 ITR 353 while interpreting the scope of Section 143(1)(a) of the Act where the status of a firm was changed to an AOP held as under( headnote ):- "The proceeding under section 143(1)(a) does not result in an order of assessment. The intimation given under section 143(1)(a) cannot be treated an order of assessment. It is only to be deemed an order for the limited purpose of sections 154, 246 and 264 of the Act. Under section 143(1)(a) of the Act, the intimation is deemed to be a notice of demand under section 156 of the Act. Except intimation, no other order is contemplated under section 143(1)(a). There is a distinction between an order of assessment and a notice of demand. Under section 246 also, a clear distinction is made between an int....