KULALA SANGHA BENGALURU(R),BENGALURU vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2543/BANG/2024Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 February 2025Bench: SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU (Accountant Member), SHRI. SOUNDARARAJAN K (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee selected a wrong code due to a technical glitch in the application form. The Tribunal decided to give the assessee a chance to correct the error and directed the CIT(E) to re-examine the issue after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an application in Form 10AB for approval under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(E) rejected the application observing that the assessee had selected a wrong code while filing the form. The assessee claimed that the correct code was not available in the dropdown menu.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application for 80G approval without providing adequate opportunity to rectify a mistake in the application form.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G(5),Section 12A,Section 12AB,Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU & SHRI. SOUNDARARAJAN K

For Appellant: Shri. Ravish Rao, CA
For Respondent: Smt. Nandini Das, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Hearing: 06.02.2025Pronounced: 17.02.2025

Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member :

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is against the Order passed by the CIT(E), Bangalore,vide DIN and Order No.ITBA/EXM45/2024- 25/1070444702(1) dated 19.11.2024, against rejecting the application filed by the assessee under section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act'), on the following grounds of appeal:

2.

Briefly stated the facts of the case are that assessee is registered under section 12A of the Act, filed Form 10AB dated 28.05.2024 for approval under section 80G of the Act. During examination of Form submitted by the assessee, learned CIT(E) observed that assessee had selected wrong code while applying form 10AB for approval under section 80G(5) of the Act. Therefore, the application was rejected. In this regard, the learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that in the drop down box, the desired code did not appear and the reason was unknown and that was the reason that while filing Form 10AB for approval the assessee selected wrong code and requested that the matter may be sent to CIT(E) for a fresh examination.

3.

On the other hand, the learned DR submitted that once the assessee selected wrong code, there is no other option left for correcting the same by learned CIT(E). There is no mistake on the part of learned CIT(E).

4.

Considering the facts of the case and submissions from both the sides, we are giving a chance to the assessee for correcting the wrong code selected and the learned CIT(E) is directed to examine the issue afresh and take decision as per law. The CIT(E) is directed to provide reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and assessee is directed to submit necessary documents to the Revenue in support of its claim for speedy disposal of the case and not to seek unnecessary adjournments.

5.

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

Pronounced in the court on the date mentioned on the caption page.

More judgments on Section 80G(5)

All 2,236 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G(5) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →