AATRAL FOUNDATION,ERODE vs. CIT EXEMPTIONS, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 902/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 noted that the time limit for filing such applications was extended by the CBDT. Therefore, the rejection based on the timeline was incorrect. The CIT(E) was directed to consider the application on its merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust filed an application for approval under Section 80G, but it was rejected by the CIT(E) for being filed beyond the prescribed timeline. The trust was incorporated in May 2021 and commenced activities in December 2021.

What were the issues?

Whether the application for approval under Section 80G was correctly rejected on the grounds of being filed beyond the prescribed timeline, considering subsequent extensions.

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./ AATRAL Foundation CIT (Exemption) बनाम/ 959,Solangapalayam Chennai. Vs. Pasur Road, Erode-638 154. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAOCM-6185-H (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (� थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : None � थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) -Ld.Sr. 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 application filed in Form No.10AB on 30.09.2023 for seeking approval under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub- section (5) of Sec.80G vide impugned order dated 11-03-2024, the assessee is in further appeal before us. At the time of hearing, none appeared for assessee.

2.

From the record, it emerges that the assessee trust filed an application in Form No.10AB on 30.09.2023 seeking registration under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of Sec.80G. It transpired that the assessee trust was incorporated on 22.05.2021 and it commenced its activities on 01.12.2021. 3. Upon perusal of impugned order, it could be seen that Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application on the ground that the application was not filed within prescribed timeline. Further, there was no extension for filing of this form. 4. We find that the time limit to file such applications have been extended by CBDT vide recent Circular No.07/24 dated 25-04-2024 extending time limit for all such applications to 30-06-2024. Therefore, there remain no grounds for rejection of application by raising the issue of timeline. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we set aside the impugned order and direct Ld. CIT(E) to consider the application on merits without raising the issue of timeline. 6. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our above order. 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 →