GEETA SHYAM FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6261/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 January 2025AY 2025-26Bench: SAKTIJIT DEY, HON'BLE (Vice President), SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 6261/Mum/2024 Assessment Years: 2025-26 Geeta Shyam Foundation 501, Fairwinds, No.5, B.T.P.S 11, Dattatraya Road Santacruz West - 400054 [PAN: AAATG8833F] Vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Mehul Shah, A/R Revenue by : Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT, D/R सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 21/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(E) should have provided an opportunity to the assessee to rectify the inadvertent error in their application. The Tribunal restored the appeal to the file of the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's application for approval under section 80G was rejected by the CIT(E) because they inadvertently mentioned clause (iv) instead of clause (iii) in their application. The first proviso to section 80G(5) outlines the timelines for submitting such applications.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application for approval under section 80G without giving an opportunity to the assessee to rectify an inadvertent error in mentioning the wrong clause.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE & SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, A/R
Hearing: 21/01/2025Pronounced: 23/01/2025

O R D E R

PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM:

1.

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order dated 05/10/2024 by ld. Commissioner of Income Tax – (Exemptions) [hereinafter ‘the ld. CIT(E)’] by which the application of the assessee seeking the approval u/s 80G of the Act was rejected.

2.

As per the scheme of the amended law, first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G requires an Assessee to make application before six months of the date of expiry of approval. The relevant proviso is reproduced here under: "Provided that the institution or fund referred to in clause (vi) shall make an application in the prescribed form and manner to the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, for grant of approval.— (i) where the institution or fund is approved under clause (vi) [as it stood immediately before its amendment by the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020], within three months from the 1st day of April, 2021; ii) where the institution or fund is approved and the period of such approval is due to expire. at least six months prior to expiry of the said period:

2 (iii) where the institution or fund has been provisionally approved, at least six months prior to expiry of the period of the provisional approval or within six months of commencement of its activities. whichever is earlier: [or] (iv) where activities of the institution or fund have-- (A) not commenced. at least one month prior to the commencement of the previous year relevant to the assessment year from which the said approval is sought; (B) commenced at any time after the commencement of such activities:”

More judgments on Section 80G

All 6,482 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →