MANTHAN FOUNDATION,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., EXEMPTION CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The tribunal held that the requirement of filing Form 10 is directory, not mandatory. Failure to file it before the due date is not fatal if the form is available when the intimation is processed.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a trust, inadvertently failed to file Form 10 for AY 2021-22 before the due date, though it was filed belatedly before assessment finalization. The CPC disallowed exemption under Section 11(2) due to this lapse.
What were the issues?
Whether the belated filing of Form 10 can lead to denial of exemption under Section 11(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- ITO v. Ramji9 citing158 Taxmann.com 114 · 2024
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “SMC”, HYDERABAD
Before: SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY
आदेश / ORDER Aggrieved by the order dated 24/03/2024 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- Na�onal Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”), in the case of Manthan Founda�on (“the assessee”) for the assessment year 2022-23, assessee preferred this appeal. 2. Assessee is a trust. Its case is that while filing the return of income for the assessment year 2021-22, inadvertently it failed to file Form 10, which it filed the same belatedly, but before the assessment was finalised. Because of such lapse, CPC while processing the return, issued an intimation under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) disallowing exemption claimed by the trust under section 11 (2) of the Act. Assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), but the Ld. CIT(A) by way of impugned order held that the AO-CPC rightly disallowed the assessee’s claim of exemption under section 11/12 of the Act in the absence of audit report filed after due date prescribed under section 139(1) of the Act, and accordingly dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 3. Hence the assessee filed this appeal contending that the requirement of filing Form 10/10B is merely directory in nature and failure to furnish the same before the due date
More judgments on Section 11(2)
- Kammavari Sangham (Regd), Bengaluru vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 1181/BANG/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Indian Roads Congress, New Delhi vs Income Tax Exemption, Ward 1(2), New DelhiITA 1516/DEL/2026[2012 - 2013]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026
- Rkkr Foundation, Chandigarh vs DCIT, Exemption Circle 1, ChandigarhITA 477/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Rkkr Foundation, Chandigarh vs DCIT, Exemption Circle 1, ChandigarhITA 477/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Imc Society of Iti Govt Central Crafts… vs Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward…ITA 1850/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed24 Sept 2026AY 2017-18
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sushama Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Saudamini Samantray vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar IiOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Keshav Rice Mill, Ganjam vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, KatakaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Utkal Suppliers,Ganjam vs. Assistant Commissioner Of CT And GST, Ganjam-I Circle,GanjamOrissa · 28 Oct 2026