M/S SHRI SANATAN DHARAM SABHA,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-EXEMPTION 2(2), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7556/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 August 2026AY 2022-233 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that filing Form 10B is directory and not mandatory. Therefore, the disallowance of Section 11 exemption solely on this ground is not justified.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed exemption under Section 11 of the Income-tax Act. The lower authorities disallowed this exemption because the assessee failed to file the mandatory Form 10B tax audit report by the due date for filing the return of income.

What were the issues?

Whether the failure to file Form 10B by the due date makes the claim for exemption under Section 11 invalid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11,Section 139(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

For Appellant: CA Sh. Rishabh Ostwal, CA
Hearing: 19.08.2026Pronounced: 19.08.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No. 7556/Del/2026, A.Y. 2022-23 Vs. M/s. Shri Sanatan Income Tax Officer, Dharam Sabha Ward- Exemption 310, D Ostwal and 2(2), Associates, Middle Circle, Civic Centre Block F- Connaught New Delhi-110002 Place, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AAETS3800L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by Sh. Deepak Ostwal, CA Sh. Rishabh Ostwal, CA Department by Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 19.08.2026 Date of pronouncement 19.08.2026

ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2022-23, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl./JCIT(A)- 7, Kolkata [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2026-27/1089654639(1), dated 12.06.2026

ITA No. 7556/Del/2026

involving proceedings under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

2.

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

Suffice to say, it transpires during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities have disallowed section 11 exemption claim(s) to the assessee; for the sole reason that it could not file/upload the prescribed 10B tax audit report within “due” date of filing section 139(1) return. The Revenue vehemently argues that the impugned disallowance of section 11 exemption deserves to be upheld as the above compliance is mandatory in nature.

3.

I find no merit in the Revenue’s instant sole substantive grievance in light of CIT vs. Xavier Kelavani Mandal (P.) Ltd., [2014] 41 taxmann.com 184 (Guj.) has already settled the issue in assessee’s favour that the foregoing compliance of filing/upholding form 10B tax audit report is only directory than mandatory in nature. That being the case, I find merit in the assessee’s instant sole substantive grievance and direct the learned Assessing Officer to frame its consequential computation as per law after verifying all the relevant facts. 2

ITA No. 7556/Del/2026

No other ground or argument has been pressed before us.

4.

These assessee’s appeal is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 19/08/2026

Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 10/09/2026 Binita, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

More judgments on Section 11

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →