TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 1448
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rt "the Act" Act, dated 28-06-2023. 2. The appeal is time barred by 4 days. In the condonation application has stated that the delay has occurred due to unavoidable circumstances being due to administrative reasons. The assessee has shown the sufficient cause not to file the appeal within time therefore, the delay is condoned and appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds in appeal as under: 1. Because the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeals erred in law on facts in dismissing the appeal and in upholding denial of exemption to the appellant, through the appellant is statutory agricultural produce market committee constituted under the Uttar Pradesh Krishi Utpatan Mandi Adhini....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....proceedings. 6. Because the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeals erred in law on facts in sustaining the consequences of processing under section 143(1) and rejection under section 154 without granting the appellant its lawful statutory exemption. 7. Because the appellant respectfully submits that in its own case for earlier assessment years, including Assessment Years 2015-16 and 2016-17 exemption under section 10(26AAB) has been accepted by the appellate and assessing authorities and the appellant seeks leave to rely upon such earlier orders in support of the present appeal. 8. Because without prejudice to the above the learned Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals ought to have restored the matter for prope....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the A.Y.2019-20 claiming exemption u/s 10(23C) of the IT Act and the same was disallowed by CPC. Vide submission dated 11-01-2024, the appellant has made certain submission, wherein he stated that return was filed claiming exemption u/s 10(23C) instead of 10(26ABB) of the IT Act. As seen from the record it is evident that the appellant has claimed exemption u/s 10(23C) of the IT Act in the ROI. As the appellant has not fulfilled the provisions of section 10(23C), the CPC has denied the exemption. Thus, there is no error in the action of the CPC, if there is a mistake in the ROI, the appellant has got the opportunity to file the revised return rectifying such mistake. But in this case as per record appellant has not filed revised return rect....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment to file return of income. He also submitted that the principal of res judicata is not strictly applicable in the proceedings of the income but consistency should be maintained. The Revenue in the assessee's own case for the A.Y. 2015-16, 2016-17 &2017-18 the Ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to allow the claim under section 10(26AAB) of the Act and assessed the income at Nil. Reliance is placed on the following judgements: (i) Krishii Utpadan Mandi Samiti Khaga vs. DCIT_CPC Bangalore (Local-ITO-2(4) Fatehpur ITA No. 69 to 86/All/2020 dated 18-11-2020 (ii) Krishii Utpadan Mandi Samiti Tikonja Lakhimpur Kheri vs. ACIT(CPC) Bangalore ITA No.688/LKW/2018 dated 10-12-2018 (iii) Kums Rura v. CPC Bangalore I....