ANJUMANE NOUNTHALANE ISLAM,COIMBATORE vs. CIT EXEMPTIONS, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3350/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 August 20264 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee was not given an opportunity to furnish the required details. Therefore, the matter was remanded to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a 3-day delay, which was condoned. The CIT(E) rejected the assessee's application under Form 10AB for non-submission of mandatory documents.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) rightly rejected the application without providing an opportunity to the assessee to submit the required documents.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10AB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI & SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA

Hearing: 25.08.2026Pronounced: 31.08.2026

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 22.03.2026 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai.

2.

We find that this appeal was filed with a delay of 03 days. The assessee filed an affidavit explaining the reasons to condone the said

:-2-: ITA No: 3350/Chny/2026

delay. On perusal of the same and upon hearing both the parties, we

find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide which really

prevented the assessee in filing the appeal in time. Thus, delay of 03

days condoned.

3.

At the outset, the ld.AR, Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate, drew our

attention to the page no. 2 of the impugned order and submits that in pursuance of assesse’s application in Form no.10AB, the CIT(E)

required the assessee to furnish trust deed/ MOA/ instrument creating

or establishing the institution, financials and note of activities and copy

of approval obtained in the old regime. Further, he referred to page no.4 of the impugned order and submits that the CIT(E) rejected the application of the assessee for non-submission of the above said

mandatory documents. He prayed to give one more opportunity to the assessee, as the assessee is ready to furnish the required details as sought by the ld.CIT(E).

4.

The ld.DR, Ms. R. Anita, CIT, reported no objection.

:-3-: ITA No: 3350/Chny/2026

5.

Upon hearing both the parties and on perusal of the impugned

order, we find the ld.AR rightly pointed out that the ld.CIT(E) rejected the application u/s. 10AB of the Act for non-submission of the required

documents which are detailed in paragraph 2.1 of the impugned order.

Therefore, it is clear that there was no opportunity for assessee in furnishing the said details before the ld.CIT(E) for his consideration and in view of the submissions of the ld.AR and ld.DR, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the ld.CIT(E) for his fresh consideration.

The assessee shall furnish the required details as sought by the ld.CIT(E) and is liberty to file evidences, if any, in support of its claim.

Thus, order of the ld.CIT(E) is set aside and grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical

purposes. Order pronounced on 31st August, 2026 at Chennai. (S.R. RAGHUNATHA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated: 31.08.2026 JPV

:-4-: ITA No: 3350/Chny/2026

आदेश की (ितिलिप अ.ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ'/Appellant, 2.()थ'/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयु//CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय (ितिनिध/DR & 5. गाड% फाईल/GF

PRASANNA VANI JETTY Date: 2026.09.01 15:30:57 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 10AB

All 190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →