Facts of the Case
The assessee, an educational institution, had not filed its
return of income. Information was received regarding cash deposits during the
demonetization period. Notices under section 142(1) were issued, but compliance
was inadequate, leading to a best-judgment assessment under section 144.
An enquiry conducted through the Income Tax Inspector
confirmed that the institution was running a school with approximately 1,252
students and was registered under the Societies Registration Act. The Assessing
Officer collected documents relating to receipts and expenditures but rejected
them as being prepared after issuance of notices.
Observing that annual receipts exceeded ₹1 crore, the
Assessing Officer denied exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiad) and, since the
institution was not registered under section 12AA, treated the excess of fees
over expenditure amounting to ₹23,35,100 as taxable income. This amount was
taxed under section 115BBE.
Issues Involved
- Whether
surplus of educational fees over expenditure can be taxed under section
115BBE.
- Whether
application of section 115BBE without invoking sections 68–69D constitutes
a mistake apparent from record.
- Whether
rectification under section 154 is permissible in such circumstances.
- Whether
rectification proceedings can address incorrect application of law in the
assessment order.
Petitioner’s Arguments
The assessee contended that section 115BBE applies only to
income assessed under sections 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C, or 69D. In the present
case, the addition represented excess of fee receipts over expenditure of an
educational institution, not unexplained income.
It was further argued that the Assessing Officer had himself
acknowledged the nature of receipts as educational fees and had assessed the
surplus as institutional income. Therefore, taxing the amount under section
115BBE was legally incorrect and constituted a mistake apparent from the record
capable of rectification under section 154.
Respondent’s Arguments
The Revenue maintained that the assessee had not explained the
credits appearing in bank accounts during assessment proceedings and that
subsequent references to section 69A justified application of section 115BBE.
It also argued that issues raised were beyond the scope of rectification and
should have been addressed through an appeal against the assessment order.
Court Order / Findings (ITAT Allahabad)
The Tribunal examined the assessment order and observed that the Assessing Officer had clearly treated the amount as excess of fees or donations over expenditure of the educational institution. The addition was not made under any of the provisions specified in section 115BBE.
Important Clarification
The Tribunal clarified that section 115BBE is a special
provision applicable only to unexplained income under specified sections.
Surplus arising from identifiable sources such as educational fees cannot be
subjected to the higher tax rate under this provision merely because exemption
is denied.
Link to download the order - https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1771066484_SARSWATIVIDHYAMANDIRINTERCOLLGEHAMIRPURVS.ITOWARD225BANDA.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and
knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information
from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or
advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability
arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the
assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment