SATHU T RAMASAMY NAICKER CHARITIES,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, MADURAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2844/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 March 2025AY 2022-23Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi (Judicial Member), Shri S.R. Raghunatha (Accountant Member)3 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found no evidence that the assessee had valid approval under Section 12AA for the assessment year 2022-23. Since the provisional approval was not retrospective, the assessee was not entitled to the exemption under Section 11.

What were the facts?

The assessee's claim for deduction under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act for AY 2022-23 was denied by the CPC and confirmed by the CIT(A) due to the absence of valid registration under Section 12AA. The assessee had a provisional approval (Form 10AC) which was effective prospectively from AY 2025-26, and not for the current assessment year.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was entitled to claim deduction under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act without valid approval under Section 12AA for the assessment year 2022-23, when provisional approval was granted for a future assessment year.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11,Section 12AA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

Hearing: 12.03.2025Pronounced: 13.03.2025

Year: 2022-23 Sathu T. Ramasamy Naicker Charities, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 212, Ramasamy Nagar, Aruppukottai, Exemption Ward 2), Virudhunagar District, Madurai. Tamil Nadu 626 105. [PAN:AAATS3587Q] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri E. Selva Ramkumar, C.A. ��थ� की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 12.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 13.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20.06.2024 passed by the Addl/JCIT(A)-1, Guwahati for the assessment year 2022-23.

2.

The assessee raised 5 grounds of appeal, amongst which, the only issue emanates for our consideration as to whether the ld. CIT(A) is justified in confirming the denial of the claim of deduction under section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] in the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. At the outset, we note that the claim of deduction under section 11 of the Act was denied by the CPC, Bengaluru vide intimation dated 22.11.2023 for having no approval under section 12AA of the Act, against which, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the denial of exemption having no registration under 12AA of the Act.

4.

The ld. AR Shri E. Selva Ramkumar, CA fairly conceded that there is no approval under section 12AA of the Act for the year under consideration, but, however, drew our attention to the provisional approval granted by the CPC. He prayed to allow the exemption under section 11 of the Act.

5.

The ld. DR Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, JCIT vehemently opposed the submissions of the ld. AR and placed on record Form 10AC, the provisional approval granted to the assessee and argued that the said provisional approval is applicable from the AY 2025-26 prospectively, but, not retrospectively. The ld. AR did not dispute the same.

6.

The ld. CIT(A) discussed the issue in detail at pages 9 & 10 of the impugned order. We find no evidence is brought on record to show that the assessee is having valid approval for the year under consideration under section 12AA of the Act entitling to claim of exemption under section 11 of the Act. Therefore, the grounds raised by the assessee fails and dismissed accordingly.

7.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced on 13th March, 2025 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 11

All 7,190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →