DEEPIKA TRUST,VILLUPURAM vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 452/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 May 2024Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Considering a recent CBDT circular extending the time limit for such applications and the assessee's failure to make representations, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust filed an appeal against the denial of registration under Section 80G(5). The assessee had failed to respond to show-cause notices and provide required details, leading to the rejection of their application by the CIT(E).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) was justified in rejecting the registration application without considering the assessee's submissions, and if a recent CBDT circular should be applied.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM & HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM

O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aggrieved by denial of registration u/s. 80G(5) by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai [CIT(E)] vide impugned order dated 16-08-2023, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

2.

The Registry has noted delay of 129 days in the appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by Ld. AR on the strength of condonation petition which is supported by an affidavit of Managing Trustee of assessee Trust. It has been submitted therein that the assessee was under a bona-fide belief that time limit would be extended further by way of Circular. It has also been submitted that managing director was not present at the station. Though Ld. CIT-DR has opposed condonation of delay, considering the fact that the assessee is a trust, we condone the delay and proceed for adjudication on merits.

3.

Upon perusal of impugned order, it could be seen that the assessee failed to respond to the show-cause notices and it could not file the requite details / clarifications. Accordingly, Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application for non-compliance. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

4.

Considering the recent Circular No.07/24 issued by CBDT on 25.04.2024 extending time limit for all such applications to 30.06.2024 and also considering the fact that the assessee could not make any representation, we set aside the impugned order and direct Ld. CIT(E) to consider the application on merits after affording opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

5.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 6th May, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (MANU KUMAR GIRI) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) �ाियक सद4 / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद4 / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे4ईChennai; िदनांकDated : 06-05-2024 DS आदेशकीQितिलिपअ/ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. � थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु=/CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाडBफाईल/GF

More judgments on Section 80G(5)

All 2,236 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G(5) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →