Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBE & SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, HON’BLE
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी ’ �यायपीठ, चे�ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI �ी मनु कुमार िग�र, �याियक सद�य एवं �ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद�य के सम� BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBE AND SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 998/Chny/2024 Commissioner of Income Tax Dr. Venkataraman Memorial v. (Exemptions), Trust, Chennai. 13, Mutt Street, Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District – 612 001. [PAN: AACTD-1983-F] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� क� ओर से/Appellant by : Shri. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate ��यथ� क� ओर से/Respondent by : Shri. V. Nandakumar, CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 24.06.2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 26.06.2024 आदेश /O R D E R PER S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
Aggrieved by rejection of application filed in Form No.10AB on 29.09.2023 for seeking approval/renewal under clause (ii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of Sec.80G vide impugned order dated 07.03.2024, the assessee is in further appeal before us. It has been stated that the application was rejected on the ground that the assessee ought to have applied under clause (iii) of first proviso to Sec.80G(5) but it wrongly applied under clause (ii).
As is evident, the assessee was been granted provisional approval from 04.04.2022 to AY 2024-25. The Ld. CIT(E) held that application filed under Clause (ii) would not be maintainable
:-2-: ITA. No: 998/Chny/2024 since the application was to be filed in Clause (iii) in assessee’s case. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.
We find that the application has been rejected merely on technical ground. It is clear that the assessee had obtained provisional approval and it sought permanent registration. By inadvertent mistake, the assessee preferred application under wrong Clause (ii) instead of Clause (iii). The assessee ought to have been granted an opportunity to rectify the same. Nevertheless, we direct Ld. CIT(E) to provide an opportunity to the assessee to rectify the application and consider the same on merits. The assessee is directed to substantiate its application.