TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 1625
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for AY 2022-23 dated 04.12.2024, which has been passed against the intimation u/s 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), dated 03.03.2023. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are reproduced as under: "1. That under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), ADDL/JCIT(A), Indore on 04/12/2024 vide DIN & Order No: ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1070870271(1) for the assessment year 2022-23 is bad-in-law, arbitrary, perverse, unsustainable and against the principles of natural justice. 2. That under the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. Commissioner of I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....see accepted Form 10B on 14.02.23 vide Acknowledgement No. 955227960140223. 6. That under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), ADDL/JCIT(A). Indore and the Deputy Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru has grievously erred in either not perusing the response filed by the assessee in response to notice u/s 143(1)(a) or not properly considering the response filed by the assessee. 7. The appellant craves leave to make any addition, alteration or modification etc., of the grounds either before the appellate proceedings, or during the course of appellate proceedings." 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee-trust is engaged in providing financial and other ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../2023, which was beyond the specified date i.e. 07/10/2022 and as the audit report in Form No. 10B had not been filed by the appellant within the due date, therefore, the action of the CPC was found to be correct and the appeal was dismissed. It was further noted that the delay in filing of Form No. 10B had not been condoned by the appropriate authority in accordance with the CBDT Circular No.16/2022 dated 19.7.2022. The Ld. CIT (A) also relied upon the decision in the case of Pr. CIT v Wipro Ltd. [2022] 140 taxmann.com 223 (SC) which was in the context of deduction u/s 10B and according to him which is equally applicable to the present case. Since in the instant case, the assessee had filed the return of income on 31.10.2022 i.e. within th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Rs. 4,44,720/-. It is stated that the CPC did not consider the details filed by the assessee and has not properly considered the reply furnished by the assessee. The as-sessee has relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax vs Rai Bahadur Bissesswarlal Motilal Malwasie Trust (1992) 195 ITR 825 (Cal), in which it is stated that the requirement of filing the audit report with the return is merely a procedural requirement and that the exemption cannot be denied so long as the report is available with the Assessing Officer before the completion of assessment. Further, reliance has been made on the decision of Hon'ble Jammu and Kashmir High Court in the case of Smt. Sneh Lata Jain vs CIT....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., directory in nature. The relevant extract from the order is as under: "The short question falls for consideration in the instant case is whether the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC was justified in allowing the appeal filed by the assessee thereby condoning the delay in filing the Form 10B of the Act. The learned Tribunal after going through the facts of the case took note of the latter circular issued by the Board in Circular No. 16 of 2022 dated 19-07-2022 issued under Section 119(2)(b) by which the powers delegated to the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax/Commissioner of Income Tax to condone the delay in filing Form 10B beyond 365 days up to 3 years from the assessment year 2018-19 or for subsequ....