AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (6) TMI 1153
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....43(1) by intimation order dated 15.9.2016 denying the claim of deduction of Rs.20 lakhs under section 11(2) of the Act and demanded a tax of Rs.2,86,525/-. As against the intimation order, the assessee filed rectification petition under section 154 of the Act, claiming that the assessee failed to file Form No.10 along with return of 1.10.2015. However, Form No.10 was uploaded by online on 2.1.2017 thereby the assessee requested the ld.AO to grant deduction of Rs.20.00 lakhs under section 11(2) of the Act. The assessee further claimed that there was no regular assessment under section 143(3) for the Asst.Year 2015-16, hence, the Form No.10 filed online on 2.1.2017 was to be taken into consideration by the AO, while passing the order under section 154 of the Act. The assessee has also further submitted that the filing of the Form No.10 along with return of income is mandatory w.e.f. 1.4.2016 i.e for the Asst.Year 2016-17 onwards. However, the rectification application was rejected by the DCIT(CPC) vide order dated 31.10.2019 as follows: "Subject: Rejection of request for Rectification, Under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961- reg. Please refer to the rectification request f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Act and investment of the money in the prescribed securities was due only to oversight; (c) that the trustees or the settlor have not been benefited by such failure directly or indirectly; (d) that the trust agrees to deposit its funds in the prescribed securities prior to the issue of the Government sanction extending the time under section 11(2); and (e) that the accumulation or setting apart of income was necessary for carrying out the objects of the trust." 4.1 The assessee has also drawn attention to Circular No.14 (XI- 35) of 1955 dated 11.4.1955 issued by the CBDT, which is reproduced as under: " Officers of the Department must not take advantage of ignorance of an assessee as to his rights. It is one of their duties to assist a taxpayer in every reasonable way, particularly in the matter of claiming and securing reliefs and in this regard the Officers should take the initiative in guiding a taxpayer where proceedings or other particulars before them indicate that some refund or relief is due to him. This attitude would, in the long run, benefit the Department for it would inspire confidence in him that he may be sure of getting a square deal from the Department. A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment would mean that the assessment order will have to be reopened. In our opinion, the Act does not contemplate such reopening of the assessment. In the case at hand it is evident from the records of the case that the respondent did not furnish the required information till after the assessments for the relevant years were completed. In the light of the above, we are of the opinion that the stand of the revenue that the High Court erred in answering the first question in favour of the assessee is correct, and we reverse that finding and answer the said question in the negative and against the assessee. In view of our answer to the first question, we agree with Mr. Verma that it is not necessary to answer the second question on the facts of the case. 7. In view of the above findings of ours, the second question referred will not arise for consideration. Accordingly, these appeals are allowed." 4.3 The assessee further relied on jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Mayur Foundation 274 ITR 562 wherein it is held as follows: "Thus, the proceedings before the Tribunal are meant to correctly assess the tax liability of an assessee: If this be so, it follows that the as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lication stating - "There is no prima facie error in the order which was sought to be rectified" Form No. 10 was not there when the Intimation u/s 143(1) was passed. Hence not considering Form No. 10 does not constitute a mistake which is apparent from record. Hence the same cannot be rectified u/s 154. For the above stated reasons rejecting the rectification request of the appellant is upheld. 7. In result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed." 6. The ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that by way of intimation under section 143(1), CPC denied the claim of deduction under section 11(2) and raised a tax demand. When rectification petition u/s.154 was filed to rectify the mistake, after filing Form No.10 on 2.1.2017 and also indicated that Form No.10 is required to be filed along return w.e.f. 1.4.2016 i.e. Asst.Year 2016-17 only. Though the assessee uploaded Form NO.10 belatedly with request to rectify the mistake, but CPC simply rejected the rectification petition on the ground that there was no prima facie error in the intimation passed under section 143(1) of the Act. The ld.AR further submitted that in the detailed written submission was filed before the ld.CIT(A)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t considering the written submissions placed before it, and passed the impugned order. 9. As rightly pointed out by the ld.AR, there are circulars issued by the CBDT as early as 1955 wherein the officers have been directed not to take advantage of ignorance of an assessee as to their right, and one of the duties of the officers is to assist a taxpayer in every reasonable way particularly in the matter of claiming of refund or relief. Thus, the Officers should take the initiative in guiding a taxpayer. This attitude would in the long run benefit the department because it would inspire confidence in assessee that he may be sure of getting a square deal from the department. 10. It is appropriate to consider sub-section 9 of section 139 of the Act provides as follows: Section 139(9) Where the [Assessing] Officer considers that the return of income furnished by the assessee is defective, he may intimate the defect to the assessee and give him an opportunity to rectify the defect within a period of fifteen days from the date of such intimation or within such further period which, on an application made in this behalf, the [Assessing] Officer may, in his discretion, allow; and if th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....licable for AY 2016-17: "(2) Where eighty-five percent of the income referred to in clause (a) or clause (b) o f sub-section (1) read with the Explanation to that subsection is not applied, or is not deemed to have been applied, to charitable or religious purposes in India during the previous year but is accumulated or set apart, either in whole or in part, for application to such purposes in India, such income so accumulated or set apart shall not be included in the total income of the previous year of the person in receipt of the income, provided the following conditions are complied with namely:- (a) such person furnishes a statement in the prescribed form and in the prescribed manner to the Assessing Officer, stating the purpose for which the income is being accumulated or set apart and the period for which the income is to be accumulated or set apart, which shall i n no case exceed five years; (b) the money so accumulated or set apart is invested or deposited in the forms or modes specified in sub-section (5); (c) the statement referred to in clause (1) is furnished on or before the due date specified under sub-section(1) of section 139 for furnishing the return of inc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sad Sarangi and Ors., [2021] 4 SCC 516. While these observations are in the context of the judicial officers, these observations will be equally applicable to the decisions by the quasi-judicial officers like us, as indeed the Assessing Officer CPC. In the inimitable words of Hon'ble Justice Chandrachud, Hon'ble Supreme Court has made the following observations: ..... Reasons constitute the soul of a judicial decision. Without them, one is left with a shell. The shell provides neither solace nor satisfaction to the litigant. We are constrained to make these observations since what we have encountered in this case is no longer an isolated aberration. This has become a recurring phenomenon. .........How judges communicate in their judgments is a defining characteristic of the judicial process. While it is important to keep an eye on the statistics on disposal, there is a higher value involved. The quality of justice brings legitimacy to the judiciary." 17. These observations of Their Lordships apply equally, and in fact with much greater vigour, to the quasi-judicial functionaries as well. Viewed thus, reasons in a quasi-judicial order constitute the soul of the quasi-judi....