ITO (EXEMPTION), WARD - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. INDIAN SUGAR MILLS ASSOCIATION, DELHI

ITA 480/KOL/2022Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 May 2023AY 2018-20195 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) order was not infirm, relying on Gujarat High Court's decision that filing Form 10B is directory. The Tribunal also noted that subsequent CBDT circulars allowed for condonation of delay up to three years.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed its return of income late and subsequently filed Form 10B much beyond the due date. The CPC denied the exemption claim, and the CIT(Exemption) rejected the condonation of delay application. The CIT(A) allowed the exemption, holding that filing Form 10B is directory.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing Form 10B can be condoned and if the exemption claim can be denied for late filing of the audit report.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11,Section 119(2)(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH ‘B’, KOLKATA

Before: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Hearing: 15.05.2023Pronounced: 25.05.2023

Per Sonjoy Sarma, JM: This appeal in ITA No. 480/Kol/2022 for A.Y. 2018-19 is preferred by the revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) [Ld. CIT in short], dated 13.06.2022. The revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:

“1. Whether from the facts & circumstances of the case, ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in not taking cognizance of the fact that an order passed u/s 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 17.08.2020 by the CIT (Exemptions) Kolkata wherein the condonation of delay in filing of Form 10B was rejected. 2. whether on the basis of facts & circumstances of the case, ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in not appreciating the fac

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 11

All 7,190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →