SARASWATHI RAMASAMY CHARITABLE TRUST,ANNUR vs. CIT EXEMPTIONS, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 728/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 May 2024Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)2 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CBDT had extended the timeline for filing such applications. Therefore, the rejection based on the timeline was set aside, and the CIT(E) was directed to consider the application on its merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's application for registration under Section 80G(5)(iii) was rejected by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) due to being filed beyond the prescribed timeline. The assessee appealed this rejection.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of an application for registration under Section 80G(5)(iii) based on a missed timeline is valid when the timeline has been subsequently extended by the CBDT.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G(5)(iii)

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 आयकरअपीलसं./ M/s. Saraswathi Ramasamy CIT(Exemptions) Charitable Trust Chennai. बनाम/ Vs. No.59/22, Dharmar Kovil Street, Annur – 641 653. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAYTS-5203-R (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ� कीओर से/ Appellant by : Shri Girish Kumar, (Advocate)– Ld.AR ��थ� की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT)-Ld. CIT. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 21-05-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 21-05-2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER BENCH

1.

Aggrieved by rejection of an application filed in Form No.10AB seeking registration u/s 80G(5)(iii) by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) vide impugned order dated 23-02-2024, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

2.

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.

3.

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.

4.

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. 5. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our above order. Order pronounced on 21st May, 2024.

More judgments on Section 80G(5)(iii)

All 687 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G(5)(iii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →