GURU MARIAPPAN SHENBAGAM FOUNDATION,MADURAI vs. CIT, EXEMPTIONS, CHENNAI
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘ए’न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
श्री यस यस विश्वनेत्र रवि, न्यावयक सदस्य एवं श्री अविताभ शुक्ला, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष
BEFORE SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.334/Chny/2025, Assessment Year: -
आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.335/Chny/2025, Assessment Year: -
आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.336/Chny/2025, Assessment Year: -
Guru
Mariappan
Shenbagam
Foundation,
No.2, West VPR Cross Road,
Chokkikulam, Madurai,
Tamil Nadu-625 002. [PAN: AABTG2556L]
The Commissioner of Income Tax
(Exemption),
Chennai.
(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)
(प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)
अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by :
Shri G.Akash, Advocate
प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by :
Ms.E.Pavuna Sundari, CIT
सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing
:
09.07.2025
घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement
:
18.07.2025
आदेश / O R D E R
PER BENCH
The below mentioned appeals have been filed by the appellant assessee contesting the order of Ld. First Appellate Authority indicated
Column-E, herein below:-
S.
No.
Appeal Nos.
AYs
Appellant
CIT(A) Order Details
Respondent
A B
C
D
E
F
-
Guru
Mariappan
Shenbagam
Foundation,
No.2, West VPR Cross
Road,
Chokkikulam, Madurai,
Tamil Nadu-625 002. [PAN: AABTG2556L]
-
The Commissioner of Income
Tax
(Exemption),
Chennai.
-
-
-
DIN & Order No.ITBA /
EXM / F / EXM45 / 2024-
25 / 1071304702(1) dated
17.12.2024. ITA Nos.334, 335 & 336/Chny/2025
Page - 2 - of 4
0 At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has informed that the assesse in respect of ITA No.334 and 335 has opted for VSVS scheme 2024 and hence would like to withdraw its above two appeals. 3.0 In view of the above, the appeals vide ITA No.334 and 335 are dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty to the appellant assessee to request for restoration of the appeals, in the event of its VSVS application not finally accepted by the Revenue. 4.0 As regards ITA No.336 the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has informed that the Ld.PCIT(Exemption) has dismissed its appeal without according due opportunity of being heard and by merely relying upon technicalities. Thus, the assessee has submitted that the rejection of its application u/s 80G(5) (iii) is erroneous. The Ld.Counsel for the assessee requested that the matter may be remitted back to the Ld.PCIT (E ) for readjudication. 5.0 Per contra, the Ld.DR relied upon the order of the Ld.PCIT(E ). 6.0 We have heard the rival submissions in the light of material available on records. We have noted from para 3.2 of the order of Ld.PCIT the following:-
“….3.2 The applicant has not furnished the details called for vide SCN dated
06.12.2024. Rule 11AA of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, prescribes the list of documents which are mandatorily required to be submitted by the applicant. It is the responsibility of the applicant to furnish each and every details called for.
In order to grant approval u/s. 80G of the Act, “Order for Registration u/s. 12AB” is essential and in this context, the applicant has furnished only the “Order for Provisional Registration” u/s.12A obtained on 14.06.2023 in Form 10AC for the period
ITA Nos.334, 335 & 336/Chny/2025
Page - 3 - of 4
from AY-2024-25 to 2026-27. It has failed to furnish the “Order for Registration u/s.12AB” of the Act.
Since the applicant failed to furnish the required details(s) as mandated by Rule
11AA of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, the application filed by the applicant in Form
No.10AB on 27.06.2024 cannot be processed as per the provisions of section 80G of the I.T.Act, 1961. Hence, the applicant is not eligible for getting approval u/s. 80G of the Act…..”
0 Thus we have noted that there is sufficient force in the argument of the appellant assessee that its application for grant of registration u/s 80G has been rejected without adequate consideration of merits and by merely relying upon technicalities. It is trite law that substance must always prevail over form. Procedural requirements and compliances are only important so long as they are meeting the end objective, but they cannot be given precedence so as to defeat the very purpose of their creation. This hypothesis is all the more relevant in the cases of grant of any beneficial exemptions to a taxpayer. Accordingly, we are of the considered view that ends of justice would be met if the issue is remitted back to the Ld.PCIT(E ) for readjudication of the matter. We therefore set aside the impugned order of the Ld.PCIT(E ) and direct him to readjudicate the assessee’s application for grnat of registration u/s 80G after giving due opportunity of being heard and by passing a speaking order, in accordance with law. The assessee shall comply with all the notices of the PCIT(E ) and any non-compliance shall be adversely
ITA Nos.334, 335 & 336/Chny/2025
Page - 4 - of 4
viewed. Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal raised in the ITA No.336
is allowed for statistical purposes.
8.0
In the result, the appeals of the assessee are decided as under:-
ITA Nos
Assessment
Year
Result
ITA No. 334 / Chny / 2025
-
Dismissed as withdrawn
ITA No. 335 / Chny / 2025
-
Dismissed as withdrawn
ITA No. 336 / Chny / 2025
-
Allowed for statistical purposes
Order pronounced on 18th , July-2025 at Chennai. (यस यस धवश्वनेत्र रधव)
(SS VISWANETHRA RAVI)
न्याधयक सदस्य / Judicial Member (अधमताभ शुक्ला)
(AMITABH SHUKLA)
लेखा सदस्य /Accountant Member
चेन्नई/Chennai, धदनांक/Dated: 18th , July-2025. KB/-
आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy to:
1. अिीिार्थी/Appellant
2. प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent
3. आयकर आयुक्त/CIT - Chennai/Coimbatore/Madurai/Salem.
4. तिभागीय प्रतितिति/DR
5. गार्ड फाईि/GF