SHRI HARI EDUCATIONAL TRUST,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEM) WARD 2(3), MUMBAI

Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer denied the claim for exemption u/s 11 and 12 of the Act for the reason that the assessee filed Form No. 10B with a delay of 145 days. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT(E), vide order dated 14.07.2026 by invoking the provisions of Section 119(2)(b) of the Act, condoned the delay in filing Form No.10B for the assessment year under consideration, i.e., assessment year 2022-23. Learned counsel placed on record a copy of the approval order condoning the delay. Inviting our attention to paragraph 5 at page 3 of the said order, learned counsel submitted that the delay in filing Form No. 10B for the assessment year 2022-23 was condoned, and therefore, in view of the order of the learned CIT(E) condoning the delay of 145 days in filing Form No. 10B, the matter should go back to the file of the Assessing Officer for re-computation by allowing exemption u/s 11 and 12 of the Act.

Heard rival contentions and perused the orders of the authorities below. On perusal of the order passed by the learned CIT(E) dated 14.07.2026 for the assessment year 2022-23, we observe that the delay of 145 days in filing Form No. 10B by the assessee for the assessment year 2022-23 was condoned. Since the Assessing Officer denied exemption u/s 11 and 12 of the Act only for the reason that Form No. 10B was filed with a delay of 145 days, and since the learned CIT(E) condoned the delay u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act, the matter should go back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment.

Thus, we set aside the assessment order and restore the assessment to the file of the Assessing Officer, who shall complete the assessment afresh after considering the claim of the assessee u/s 11 and 12 of the Act in accordance with the law, after providing adequate opportunity to the assessee.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.