2024 (9) TMI 476

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r : "1. The order of the learned Addl/Joint JCIT(A)-2 Mumbai (JCIT) in holding that the Appellant trust is not eligible for exemption is totally contrary to the facts and evidence on record. 2. The learned Addl/JCIT erred in holding that the assessing officer has rightly disallowed the exemption claimed therefore confirming the assessment of the TRUST on an Income of Rs. 82,83,576/-. 3. The learned JCIT failed to note that the decision of the Supreme Court in CC vs. Dilip Kumar & Company [2018] 95 Taxmann.com 327 cited in the order passed u/s. 250 were inapplicable to the provisions relating to Section 11 & 12 which were a separate code by itself and the delay caused was only a curable defect and the learned JCIT ought to have given a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 10B after due date in violation of Rule 12A(1)(bA) of Income Tax Rules, 1962. It is a trite law that if a thing is said to be done in a particular manner, it shall be done in that manner and its performance in any other mode or fashion shall be of no consequence. Therefore, in application of the above decisions of the apex court and also the mandated provisions of the statute, the Assessing Officer has rightly disallowed the exemption claimed and made addition of the same to the total income of the appellant as per the provisions of section 143(1)(a)(ii). Accordingly, I am not inclined to interfere with the decision of the Assessing Officer. These grounds of appeal are hereby dismissed. In the result, appeal is dismissed.." 5. Aggrieved....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Therefore, the Ld. AR requested before the Tribunal to allow the exemption claimed u/s. 11 of the Act of Rs. 82,83,576/-. 6. Per contra, Ld. DR placed heavy reliance on the orders of the Ld. First Appellate Authority and vehemently opposed the submission made on behalf of the assessee. 7. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material available on record and gone through the order of the Ld. First Appellate Authority. The revenue authorities did not allow the exemption claimed u/s 11 of the Act of Rs. 82,83,576/- contending that the assessee had not filed the ROI and Form 10B within the due date specified under the Act and finally raised a demand of Rs. 34,47,810/-. As far as the delay in filing of Form no. 10B is concerned t....