TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 968
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee. The total income as per ROI was at Rs. 14,14,720/-. Prepaid taxes were at Rs. 23,600/-. Hench tax payable was worked out at Rs. 2,20,190/- Hence demand for remainder tax at Rs. 2,20,190/-. Thereafter the assessee submitted a rectification application before CPC seeking granting of relief u/s. 89 of the act which was rejected vide rectification order dated 29.06.2024 by giving following reasons which is reproduced by us as below:- "Under Section 154 of Income Tax Act 1961, an application for rectification can be filed only to correct mistakes apparent from records. In the rectification request filed, fresh/additional/reduction claim beyond what was claimed in the return is being claimed. Since fresh claim/additional claim is not considered mistake apparent from records, your rectification request cannot be entertained." "The aforesaid order u/s. 154 is here in after referred to as the "Impugned rectification Order". Section 89 gives the relief to assessee when the salary etc. is paid in arrears or in advance & falls under chapter VIII-Relief for income tax. Relevant rule is 21A/21AA & submission of form 10E for relief u/s. 89. 2.2 That the assessee being aggriev....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stries 201 ITR 325 Navbharat Charitable Trust v. Income-tax Officer [2023] 150 taxmann.com 311 (Surat-Trib.) Sarvodaya Charitable Trust v. Income Tax Officer. (Exemption) [2021] 125 taxmann.com 75 (Gujarat) Saraswati Bal Kalyan Nyas v. ITO (Exemption) ITA No.296/Ind/ 2018 5.2.2 At the outset it is stated that the Case laws relied upon by the Appellant do not squarely cover the facts in instant appeal. In the case of Savitri Foundation vs. ITO (supra) the Mumbai ITAT, following the decision of Mumbai High Court in CIT vs. Mumbai Metropolitan Regional Iron & Steel Market Committee has observed that, non-filing of Audit Report in Form 10B along with Return of Income is merely a procedural defect which is rectifiable. If the Audit Report was available with the assessee at the time of filing of Return of Income and was not filed due to Bonafide reasons the benefit of exemption under Section 11 of IT Act cannot be denied if otherwise assessee is eligible to claim the same. 5.2.3 In the case of M/s Satish Cold Storage the issue was whether a tax deduction under Section 80IB of the Income Tax Act could be allowed if the required audit report (Fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ithin a reasonable period of time after filing of the return of income. Firstly, no technical glitch has been reported by other assesses that prevented them from uploading the Forms on the e-filing portal during the year under consideration. Secondly, in case there was any technical issue with the e-filing portal which genuinely prevented the Appellant from uploading Form 10E, the same certainly would not have persisted for 3 long years. It thus, transpires that the Appellant has uploaded Form 10E only after rejection of the rectification application by the AO. It was thereafter that the Appellant filed another rectification application before CPC seeking relief under section 89 of the Act which was rightly rejected by the CPC as the prescribed Form 10E was filed with a delay of almost 3 years. The correct course of action for the Appellant in the instant case would have been to file for condonation of delay in filing of Form 10E before the Jurisdictional Pr/Commissioner of Income tax and after being granted the same, to upload the Form 10E. The Appellant on the other hand resorted to devious means as has been elaborately discussed in the preceding paras. 5.2.7 Fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing statute should be read as it is and held that the exemption /deduction provisions should be "strictly" and "literally" complied with and, therefore, a strict interpretation should be adopted. The Hon'ble SC also rejected the legal argument that a purely procedural requirement should not be construed as being mandatory in nature and categorically stated that an exemption provision should be given a strict interpretation. It may be noted that in Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. Calcutta Knitwears, Ludhiana (2014). 6 SCC 444, the Hon'ble SC had held that the foremost principle of interpretation is the rule of strict interpretation. 5.2.9 Therefore, the Appellate authority does not find any discrepancy in the Rectification Order and no adverse interference is drawn. The Appeal filed on all the grounds are dismissed on merits as well. The Appellant may however seek necessary condonation from the concerned Jurisdictional Pr.Commissioner of Income tax who has the authority to condone the late filing of Form 10E. 5.3. Ground No. 4: General: The appeal filed on Ground No 4 is general in nature does not require specific adjudication. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d on 29.06.2024. [Reasons stated by us as above]. Our attention was invited to the internal page 29 of the impugned order & so also internal page 26 of the "Impugned Order". It was also submitted that ultimately form 10E for relief u/s. 89 was filed on 06.09.2023 as due to covid-19 earlier it could not be filed while filing ROI on 19.12.2020. The original intimation order u/s. 143(1) was dated 24.12.2020. It was finally submitted that due benefit be extended now. Per contra Ld. DR for & on behalf of the assessee submitted that the revenue leaves the issue to this Tribunal wisdom to take an appropriate call with regard to relief u/s. 89. In the rejoinder the Ld. AR submitted that the section 154 application was filed in time. It was submitted that assessee is a government employee. The bench raised a query basis page 2 of PB (intimation order u/s. 143(1)internal page 2) as why the amount is Rs. 2,20,193/- as relief u/s. 89 whereas as per the page 8 [form 10E] amount u/s. 89 is show as Rs. 2,10,939/-. Please explain the difference to which the Ld. AR replied that the same would be explained to the Ld. AO if the matter is remanded. Hearing was over & concluded. 4. Observations Find....