V PONNUSAMY EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,NAMAKKAL vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 900/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 July 2024Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the application should not be rejected on mere technical grounds. The CIT(E) was directed to grant the assessee an opportunity to rectify the mistake and then decide the application on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust applied for registration under Section 80G(5)(ii) of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) rejected the application, stating it should have been filed under Section 80G(5)(iii). The assessee admitted this was an inadvertent mistake.

What were the issues?

Whether an application for registration under Section 80G can be rejected on a technical ground of selecting the wrong sub-clause, or if the assessee should be given an opportunity to rectify the error.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” �ायपीठ चे�ई म�। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय �ी महावीर िसंह, उपा ! एवं माननीय �ी मनोज कुमार अ%वाल ,लेखा सद( के सम!। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ V. Ponnusamy Educational and CIT (Exemption) बनाम/ Charitable Trust Chennai. 31/10, Co-operative Colony, Vs. Gandhi Nagar, Namakkal-637 001. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAATV-4381-M (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (� थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri S.R.Srikrishna (CA)- Ld.AR � थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) -Ld. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 24-06-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 03-07-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

1.

Aggrieved by rejection of an application filed in Form No.10AB seeking registration u/s 80G(5)(ii) vide impugned order dated 07.03.2024, the assessee is in further appeal before us. Upon perusal of para-3.1 of impugned order, it could be seen that the assessee was granted provisional approval from 08.11.2021 to AY 2024-25. The Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application on the ground that the application ought to have been filed under 80G(5)(iii). Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

2.

The Ld. AR has submitted that, by inadvertent mistake, the applicable clause was picked as clause (ii) instead of clause (iii). The Ld. AR, therefore, submitted that the application may be considered under correct clause (iii).

3.

We are of the considered opinion that the application ought not to be rejected on mere technical grounds. The wrong selection of clause may be due to an inadvertent error and the same may be in view of the fact that new regime of registration of trust was brought in place very recently. The applicant ought to have been granted an opportunity to rectify the error. Therefore, we direct Ld. CIT(E) to grant an opportunity to the assessee to rectify the mistake and thereafter, proceed for disposal of application on merits after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 4. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 3rd July, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) उपा45 / VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद7 / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे9ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated : 03-07-2024 DS आदेशकीGितिलिपअ%ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. � थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयुA/CIT Chennai. 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाडFफाईल/GF

More judgments on Section 80G

All 6,482 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →