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: The appeals by the assessees in ITA Nos.873, 874, 875 & 878/CHNY/2024 are arising out of different orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai of even date 07.03.2024, rejecting Form No.10AB filed for seeking registration/approval/recognition u/s.80G(5) of the Act due to the reason that in assessees application a mistake has occurred while uploading Form No.10AB in selecting the code of clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act, code of clause (ii) of the first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act was selected. Further, the CIT(E) has not provided opportunity to the assessees to rectify the mistake and straightaway rejected the application. The grounds raised by the assessees in these four appeals are identically worded,
- 3 - ITA Nos.873 to 878/Chny/2024 facts and circumstances are exactly identical and hence, will take the facts from ITA No.873/CHNY/2024 in the case of M/s. Sri La Sri Sivanandha Mouna Swamigal Trust. The grounds raised are factual, argumentative and hence, need not be reproduced.
Brief facts are that the assessee filed application on 30.09.2023 in Form No.10AB under clause (ii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act. The CIT(E) noted that the assessee’s case is for fresh approval and assessee ought to have filed its application under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act but assessee has erroneously filed its application in Form No.10AB under clause (ii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act which covers the cases of trusts which are already approved and seeking re-approval. The CIT(E) in all these four appeals have given identical finding and the same reads as under:- “4.1. In the light of the fact that the applicant had been granted only provisional approval for a period from 07.04.2022 To AY 2024-25, as stated above, the present application in Form 10AB filed under clause (ii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) seeking approval is prima-facie non-maintainable.
4.2. As explained in para 1 of this order, as per the provisions of clause (i) of second proviso to section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, , if the application is made under sub-clause (ii) or sub-clause (ii) or sub-clause (iv)(B) of section 80G(5) and the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner has not satisfied, he can reject the application as well as cancel the approval of the trust/institution. The application filed by the applicant on 30.09.2023 in Form No. 10AB u/s 80G(5)(i) seeking approval u/s.12AB of the I.T. Act,
- 4 - ITA Nos.873 to 878/Chny/2024 1961 is not maintainable for the reason stated above in Para 4.1 of this order, hence, it is rejected and its approval also cancelled.”
Since the CIT(E) has not granted proper opportunity to rectify the mistake, we set aside the orders of CIT(E) and remand the matter back to the file of CIT(E) for fresh adjudication on merits. In term of the above, the CIT(E) is directed to pass a speaking order on merits without going into the technicalities. Accordingly, all these four appeals of assessees are allowed for statistical purposes.
The appeals by the assessees in ITA Nos.876 & 877/CHNY/2024 are arising out of different orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai of even date 05.03.2024, rejecting Form No.10AB filed for seeking registration/approval/recognition u/s.12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act due to the reason that in assessees 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. Further, the CIT(E) has not provided opportunity to the assessees to rectify the mistake and straightaway rejected the application. The grounds raised by the assessees in these two appeals are identically worded, facts and circumstances are exactly identical and hence, will take the facts from ITA No.876/CHNY/2024 in the case of M/s. Vellore Institute of
- 5 - ITA Nos.873 to 878/Chny/2024 Technology Alumini Association. The grounds raised are factual, argumentative and hence, need not be reproduced.
Brief facts are that the assessee filed application on 28.09.2023 in Form No.10AB u/s.12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act. The CIT(E) noted that the assessee’s case is for fresh approval and assessee ought to have filed its application u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act but assessee has erroneously filed its application in Form No.10AB u/s.12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act which covers the cases of trusts which are already approved and seeking re-approval. The CIT(E) in both appeals have given identical finding and the same reads as under:- “4.1. In the light of the fact that the applicant had been granted only provisional approval for a period of 3 years (from AY 2022-23 to AY 2024- 25), as stated above, the present application in Form 10AB filed u/s.12A(1)(ac)(ii) seeking renewal of registration is prima-facie non 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 (iii) 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 28.09.2023 in Form No. 10AB u/s 12(1)(ac)(ii) 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 approval also cancelled.”
Since the CIT(E) has not granted proper opportunity to rectify the mistake, we set aside the orders of CIT(E) and remand the
- 6 - ITA Nos.873 to 878/Chny/2024 matter back to the file of CIT(E) for fresh adjudication on merits. In term of the above, the CIT(E) is directed to pass a speaking order on merits without going into the technicalities. Accordingly, both the appeals of assessees are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos.873, 874, 875, 876, 877 & 878/CHNY/2024 are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing on 24th June, 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 24th June, 2024 RSR
आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��यथ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु� /CIT, Chennai/Madurai 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड� फाईल/GF.