M/S. LIFE HELP CENTRE FOR HANDICAPPED,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-3,, CHENNAI

Before us, the ld. AR Shri D. Anand, Advocate submits that the audit report in Form No. 10B was uploaded one day in advance to the filing of return of income on 02.03.2021 and the intimation order was passed by denying exemption under section 11 of the Act on 24.10.2021. He submits that the CPC Bengaluru was not justified in denying the exemption under section 11 of the Act having the audit report in Form 10B on record as on the date of passing intimation order. Further, he submits that the assessee could not file the return of income under section 139(1) of the Act due to Covid-19 pandemic. The staff of auditor and the assessee were affected by Covid-19 virus. In similar facts, this Tribunal, in the case of Sri Vetri Vinayagar Educational Trust v. ITO in dated 13.12.2023 for AY 2016-17, remanded the matter to the file of Assessing officer for fresh consideration by holding that the delay in filing of Form No. 10B could not disentitle the trust in claiming exemption under section 11 of the Act by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT v. Spic Educational Foundation in TCA No. 1593 of 2008 dated 12.12.2018.

The ld. DR Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT submits that the ld. CiT(A) passed reasoned order as the assessee should have filed an appeal against the intimation passed under section 143(1) of the Act instead of filing appeal against the order under section 154 of the Act. He supports the order of the ld. CIT(A) and prayed to dismiss the ground raised by the assessee.

Upon hearing both the parties, we note that the CBDT extended the due date for filing of return of income in 2020 due to outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic upto 15.02.2021. Originally due date for filing of return of income was 31.10.2020. The assessee could not file the return of income within the due date of 15.02.2021 due to outbreak of Covid-19 and imposition of nation-wide lockdown. The assessee explained the reasons for non-filing of return of income within the extended due date before the ld. CIT(A).

On similar identical facts, this Tribunal against rectification order under section 154 of the Act remanded the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration with a direction to the Assessing Officer to examine the admissibility of benefit rather than to foreclose assessee on technicalities. In the present case, as rightly pointed out by the ld. AR, the audit report in Form No. 10B was very much on record on the date of passing intimation order and also it was placed on record under section 154 proceedings. The Tribunal, by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT v. Spic Educational Foundation (supra) directed the jurisdictional Assessing Officer to verify the Form 10B filed by the assessee and allow the claim of exemption under section 11 of the Act. The facts and circumstances of the present case are similar to the facts in the case of Sri Vetri Vinayagar Educational Trust v. ITO (supra). Therefore, following the same, we direct the jurisdictional Assessing Officer to examine the audit report in Form No. 10B and allow the claim of the assessee. The assessee is at liberty file evidence in support of its claim. Thus, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 04th September, 2024 at Chennai.