TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (12) TMI 1534
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it was only when a recovery letter dated 09.04.2024 for the Assessment Year 2019-20 and another recovery letter dated 24.05.2024 for Assessment years 2018-19 and 2019-20 was received from the DCIT (Exemption), Chandigarh for the pending demand that the assessee confronted this fact to their C.A., D.P. Singh with the factual issues and then he hurriedly filed the appeal for both the years and thereafter, his services was terminated and new Counsel was engaged and all this happened because of the fact that the accounts branch and Comptroller office were not having any knowledge of the Income Tax matters and were solely dependent upon the C.A., D.P. Singh and the assessee had placed before us in Paper Book, documentary evidence of the various emails, letters and other correspondence with the C.A., D.P. Singh and C.A., D.P. Singh had confirmed to them that the appeals are pending and the matter is being resolved and which fact the assessee became aware only when the recovery notices were received for the first time from the office of the DCIT (Exemption) Chandigarh. 4. The assessee also relied upon the judgments of various Courts in which, following the judgment of the Apex Court, i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing. Reference was also made to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of 'Esha Bhattacharya vs. Managing Committee of Raghunathpur Nafar Academy and Others' in Civil Appeals Nos. . 8183-8184 of 2013 order dated 13.09.2013, wherein, it has been held as under: The expression "sufficient cause" employed by the legislature is adequately elastic to enable the courts to apply the law in a meaningful manner which sub serves the ends of justice, for that is the life-purpose for the existence of the institution of courts. The learned Judges emphasized on adoption of a liberal approach while dealing with the applications for condonation of delay as ordinary a litigant does not stand*to benefit by lodging an appellate and refusal to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and the cause of justice being defeated." 8. Keeping in view of the above said facts and the case laws as discussed above, the delay of 691 days and 706 days in both the Assessment years i.e., 2018-19 & 2019-20 are condoned. 9. On the merits of the addition, the Assessee has taken following grounds of appeal in assessment year 2018-19: 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....allowance as made by the Assessing Officer. 11. The same issue was there before the ld. CIT (A) and the ld. CIT (A) in a detailed order at page 10 of the order mentioned that the assessee is entitled to claim the exemption u/s 10(23C) (iiiab) but then he upheld the disallowance as made u/s 143(3) and 143(1) even though in the last line of the order, he mentioned that the appeal is allowed. 12. The ld. Counsel of the assessee argued vehemently that it is just a bonafide error on the part of the counsel of the assessee who did not mention correct section/sub-clause for the purpose of claiming the exemption which the assessee is otherwise entitled to and relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Heidrick and Struggles Inc. as reported in [2024] 461 ITR 33 in which after relying upon the Circular of CBDT No. 19 of 1955 wherein, it has been held that in the matter of claiming and securing relief, the officers of the department should take the initiative in guiding the taxpayer for claiming relief wherever it is due even if, the assessee may have inadvertently omitted to claim the same have been in the return of income. The assessee also r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....are number of case laws supporting view that in case there is a mistake by Assessee for claiming legitimate deduction, the Assessing Officer is duty bound to consider such legitimate deduction to the Assessee even if it was 7 not claimed or claimed under wrong sections. Accordingly, we do not find any justification in the findings given by the Addl/JCIT (A) and so it cannot be sustained, thus Assessee's appeal on this issue is allowed. 17. Thus, following the above said judgment, the assessee's appeal for claim of deduction u/s 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 stands allowed. ITA No. 492/Chd/2024: ( A.Y. 2019-2020) 18. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal for assessment year 2019-20: 1. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee and disallowing the benefit of exemption as claimed by the assessee to the tune of Rs. 5,30,26,31,567/- 2. That the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi having admitted the fact that the assessee is entitled to exemption u/s 10(23C) (iii ab) but due to wrong mentioning of the section by the CA, D.P. Singh, while filing the return of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s, the exemption was disallowed. The Ld. Counsel of the assessee argued that as per facts brought on record that the assessee is substantially financed which is evident from the grants received in the year under consideration to the tune of Rs. 421.44 crore out of Rs. 530.26 crore receipts and thus, it is a substantially financed university and for substantially financed university there is no requirement of audit as per tenth proviso which specifically excludes conducting of audit/report u/s 44AB and the report of such audit in prescribed form if the claim of the exemption falls u/s 10(23)(iiiab). 21. We have gone through the facts and the arguments as advanced by both the parties and though the facts & circumstances are the same as in appeal for AY 2018-19 and we have also gone through the observation of the ld. CIT (A) at page 9 of the order and also gone through the arguments of the Ld. Counsel wherein, he has pointed out that the said audit report as mentioned supra is not applicable where the claim of assessee is entitled to the exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiab) and it was only when it was inadvertent mistake on the part of the then counsel CA, DP Singh that wrong sec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y of this Stanip certificate should be verified at www.sheile QE 0008605782 Any discrepancy in the details on this Certificate and as available on the weblege Stamp Mobile App of Stock Hang The onus e' checking the legitimacy is on the users of the certificate. 3. In case of any discrepancy please inform the Competent Authority E-STAMP NO: IN-PB57282360103631W AFFIDAVIT I, Shammi Kapoor S/o Sh. Om Parkash Kapoor R/o 6/11, Punjab Agricultural University, Campus, Ludhiana do hereby solemnly state and affirm as under:- 1. That I have been employed in Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana since July 1992 and for the past over one year holding the Additional charge as 'Comptroller' of the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana 2. That certain appeals for Asstt. Year 2018-19 and 2019-20 have been filed before the Hon'ble ITAT, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh and which are late as under:- Asstt. Year 2018-19 a). Order passed by the Ld.CIT (A) on 09.05.2022 b). The appeal was to be filed on or before 08.07.2022 c). The appeal was filed on 29.05.2024 The appeal is late by 691 days Asstt. Year 2019-20 a). ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rding "status of appeals" as per pages 8 to 11 of Paper Book-A. BY PUBLIC Ashwani Jolly LUDHIANA (Pb.) Regd. No. 2784 OF BIA INDI That CA. D.P. Singh was not responding, then a letter dated 26.10.2023 was delivered to his office, which is placed at page 12 of the Paper Book, enquiring from him about the various demands and also current status of appeal. iv). That we received an e-mail, dated 02.11.2023 from CA, D.P. Singh, as per page 13 of Paper Book-A in which, he stated that, "all the material have been accepted and the appeal is finalized in favour of revenue. But again written that appeal of the assessee is allowed and further, the Income Tax department has written to CIT (A) for clarification". v). That again we sent various e-mails asking for "current status of appeals", which is evident from e-mail sent on 08.11.2023 and 10th November, 2023, evidence placed at page 13 to 15 of Paper Book-A. Then, even the matter was also brought to the Hon'ble 2 E-STAMP HOS IH-PB57282360103631W NOTAR Vice Chancellor, PAU, Ludhiana regarding the above issues of pending appeals and conduct of CA D.P. Singh as ....