KAUMARA MADALAYAM,COIMBATORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), COIMBATORE, COIMBATORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 680/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 August 2024AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that while exemption under Section 10(23BBA) was not available, the assessee was eligible for exemption under Section 11 based on the second proviso to Section 12A(2) due to obtaining registration during the pendency of appeal proceedings.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a religious institution, claimed exemption under Section 10(23BBA) which was denied by the Assessing Officer and CIT(A). The assessee subsequently obtained registration under Section 12AB.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is eligible for exemption under Section 11 by virtue of obtaining registration under Section 12AB during the pendency of appeal proceedings, given the denial of exemption under Section 10(23BBA).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10(23BBA),Section 11,Section 12A(2),Section 12AB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA

Hearing: 13.06.2024Pronounced: 30.08.2024

per second proviso to Section 12A(2) of the Act, which reads as follows : “Provided further that where registration bas been granted to the trust or institution under section 12AA or section 12AB, then, the provisions of sections 11 and 12 shall apply in respect of any income derived from property held under trust of any assessment year preceding the aforesaid assessment year, for which assessment proceedings are pending before the Assessing Officer as on the date of such registration and the objects and activities of such rust or institution remain the same for such preceding assessment year”

13.

We note that the assessee has relied on the following decisions of the various courts, which are in favour of the assessee’s claim of exemption u/s.11 in the present facts of the case.

1.

a) CIT vs. Mayur Foundation (supra), b) SNDP Yogam vs ADIT (supra) c) Shree Bhanushali Mitra Mandal Trust vs. ITO (supra), 10 -: 14. In the present facts and circumstances of the cases, we note that the assessee is a notified religious institution as enumerated under the Tamil Nadu HR&CE Act, 1959 and obtained the registration U/s.12AA of the Act was granted by the CIT(E) vide its order No.AABTK6034B22CH01 dated 21/03/2023 w.e.f. assessment years 2022-23 to 2026-27 during the pendency of the appeal proceedings. As per the second proviso to Section 12A(2) of the Act, the assessee obtained registration before the disposal of the appeal by the Ld.CIT(A), and respectfully following the decisions of the Hon’ble courts (supra) relied by the assessee in support of the claim exemption U/s.11, we are inclined to allow the appeal of the assessee and direct the AO to re-compute the total income of the assessee by allowing exemption U/s.11 of the Act.

15.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced on 30th August, 2024.

More judgments on Section 10(23BBA)

All 26 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10(23BBA) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →