Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGHAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL
PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT: These appeals by two different assessees are arising out of the different orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai, both dated 05.03.2024, rejecting Form No.10AB u/s.12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’) rejecting Form No.10AB u/s.12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’) filed for seeking registration/ approval/recognition u/s.12AB of the Act.
The only common issue in these two appeals of assessee is as regards to the orders of CIT(Exemption) rejecting the application filed in Form No.10AB filed for seeking registration/approval/ recognition u/s.12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act due to the reason that in assessee’s application a mistake has occurred while uploading Form No.10AB in selecting the code 12A(1)(c)(iii), code 12A(1)(c)(ii) was selected. The facts and circumstances are exactly identical in both the cases and hence, we will take the facts from ITA No.1330/CHNY/2024 in the case of Thiru G. Varadharajulu Chettiyar Higher Secondary School Managing Committee. The relevant grounds raised by assessee read as under:-
- 3 - ITA Nos.1330 & 1331/Chny/2024 GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions), Chennai is not justified in rejecting the application filed in Form 10AB for renewal of registration granted earlier u/s 12AB of the Act.
The appellant submits that an inadvertent mistake had occurred while uploading the Form 10AB in that instead of selecting the code 12A(1)(c) (ii), the code of 12A(1) (c) (i) was selected by the official who uploaded the form.
The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions), Chennai has rejected the application for renewal of registration due to the said technical mistake which is not justified.
The appellant submits that the mistake committed while uploading the Form 10AB was unintentional and should have been excused.
We have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. We noted that the assessee has filed application seeking registration u/s.12AB of the Act online in Form No.10AB u/s.12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act on 30.09.2023, which deals with the cases where trust or institution is registered u/s.12AB of the Act and application is to be made within the period of said registration is due to expire, atleast six months prior to expiry of the said period. The CIT(E) noted that the assessee ought to have filed its application u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act and instead of the same, the assessee has filed application u/s.12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act. The CIT(E) noted that the assessee should have filed its application u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act and instead of the same, the assessee has filed application u/s.12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act. The CIT(E) noted
- 4 - ITA Nos.1330 & 1331/Chny/2024 that the assessee’s case is that for fresh registration, the assessee should have filed its application u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) for converting provisional registration to regular registration. He noted that the applicant has erroneously filed its application in Form 10AB seeking registration u/s.12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act, which covers the cases of trust which are already registered. He rejected the application by giving the following decision:- 4. Decision 4.1. In the light of the fact that the applicant had been granted only provisional registration for a period of 3 years (from AY 2021-22 to AY 2023-24) as stated above, the present application in Form 10AB filed u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(i) seeking renewal of registration is prima-facie non- maintainable.
4.2 As explained in para 1.2 of this order, as per the provisions of section 12AB (1 )(b) clause (ii) (B) of the I.T.Act, 1961, if the application is made under sub-clause (ii) or sub-clause (ii) or sub-clause (v) of section 12A(1)(ac) and the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner has not satisfied, he can reject the application as well as cancel the registration of the trust/institution. The application filed by the applicant on 30.09.2023 in Form No. 10AB u/s 12(1)(ac)(i) seeking renewal of registration u/s.12AB of the I.T. Act, 1961 is not maintainable for the reason stated above in Para 4.1 of this order, hence, it is rejected and its registration also cancelled.
We, after hearing both the sides and going through the facts of the case noted that the CIT(E) has not provided opportunity to the assessee to rectify the mistake and straightaway rejected the application. Considering the entirety of facts, we set aside the order of CIT(E) and remand the matter back to his file for reconsideration
- 5 - ITA Nos.1330 & 1331/Chny/2024 of assessee’s application on merits. In term of the above, the CIT(E) is directed to pass a speaking order on merits without going into the technicalities. The assessee will be allowed to file application u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act.
Similar are the facts in the case of Sri Narayanasamy Educational and Charitable Trust in ITA No.1331/CHNY/2024. Hence taking a consistent view, we set aside the order of CIT(E) and remand the matter back to his file for reconsideration of assessee’s application on merits. In term of the above, the CIT(E) is directed to pass a speaking order on merits without going into the technicalities.. The assessee will be allowed to file application u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act.
In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos.1330 & 1331/CHNY/2024 are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing on 22nd July, 2024 at Chennai.
Sd/- Sd/- (महावीर �सह ) (मनोज कुमार अ�वाल) (MAHAVIR SINGH) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) उपा�य� /VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे�ई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated, the 22nd July, 2024
- 6 - ITA Nos.1330 & 1331/Chny/2024 RSR
आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��यथ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु� /CIT, Chennai 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड� फाईल/GF.