TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 1261
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al of Revenue in ITA No.619/Chd/2022 for Assessment Year 2011-12 as a lead case for discussion wherein the Revenue has raised the following grounds: "1. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was right in ignoring the fact that the assessee was not entitled to exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act. 2. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was right in holding that the assessee was not required to file its return of income under section 139. 3. Whether the CIT(A) was right in holding that a return of income filed u/s 147 in response to a notice u/s 148 was adequate and proper substitute for filing a return of income u/s 139 of the Act. 4. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was right in ignoring the applicability of section 119(2)(b) of the Act in the matter of non-filing of return of income." 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee, namely Punjab State Board of Technical Education & Industrial Training, Chandigarh, is a statutory educational body established and controlled by the Government of Punjab for the development and regulation of technical education in the State of Punjab. Information was received by the department through AIR/CIB that during the relevant pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....5 CTR 212 (Karnataka High Court), Raj Kumar Chawla vs. ITO, 1 SOT 934 (Delhi ITAT), CIT vs. Sakal Relief Fund, 152 DTR 89 (Bombay High Court), Prem Chand Markanda SD College for Women vs. ACIT(E) and various other decisions. 5.1 The assessee further contended that section 12A(1)(ba), mandating filing of return within the due date prescribed under section 139(1), was inserted only by the Finance Act, 2017, with effect from 01.04.2018 and therefore, the same was prospective in nature and could not be applied to deny exemption for the years under consideration. It was also argued that the second proviso to section 12A(2) being retrospective in operation extended the benefit of registration under section 12AA to earlier assessment years where proceedings were pending. 5.2 The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee, accepted the claim of the assessee and held that the return filed in response to notice under section 148 was to be treated as a return filed under section 139 of the Act and therefore exemption under sections 11 and 12 could not be denied merely on account of non-filing of original return under section 139. The additions made by the Assessing Of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ders and submitted that the assessee admittedly did not file any return of income under section 139(1)/139(4A) within the prescribed time, and that the assessee sought to raise the claim of exemption only after issuance of notices under section 148 of the Act. According to the Ld. DR, the exemption claim was clearly an afterthought intended to avoid tax liability arising in reassessment proceedings. 8.1 The Ld. DR submitted that reassessment proceedings under section 147/148 are proceedings initiated for the benefit of the Revenue for bringing escaped income to tax and cannot be converted into proceedings enabling the assessee to seek fresh reliefs or claims not made in the original proceedings. Reliance in this regard was placed upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Sun Engineering Works (P.) Ltd., 198 ITR 297 (SC), wherein it was categorically held that reassessment proceedings are not intended to benefit the assessee and the assessee cannot convert reassessment proceedings into review or revision proceedings for claiming fresh reliefs. 8.2 The Ld. DR further submitted that the aforesaid principle has now been elaborately considered and reaff....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the Act. Initially, exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiab) was claimed and subsequently the assessee altered its stand and sought exemption under sections 11 and 12 on the strength of registration granted under section 12AA with effect from assessment year 2015-16. 9.2 The principal argument advanced on behalf of the assessee is that once a return is filed in response to notice under section 148, the same assumes the character of a return filed under section 139 and therefore exemption claims are required to be considered on merits. Though the submission appears attractive at first blush, on deeper examination, we are unable to persuade ourselves to accept the same in the peculiar facts of the present case. 9.3 The deeming fiction treating a return filed under section 148 as a return under section 139 cannot be read divorced from the object and scheme of reassessment proceedings. The reassessment jurisdiction under section 147 is a special jurisdiction intended to bring escaped income to tax. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Sun Engineering Works (P.) Ltd. (supra) has authoritatively held that reassessment proceedings are for the benefit of the Revenue and....