M/S SIDDHARTH UNIVERSITY,SIDDHARTH NAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E), LUCKNOW

(A) The present appeal vide has been filed by the assessee against order of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (“Pr. CIT” for short) dated 09/07/2021 whereby the assessee has been granted provisional approval under Section 10(23C) of Income Tax Act (“IT Act” for short) for assessment years 2021-22 to assessment year 2023-24. The grounds of appeal are as under: Assessment Year:2020-21 2

“1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax has erred in law and on facts in passing the order, which is unlawful, unjustified and against the principles of natural justice.

(B) Vide order sheet dated 15/02/2022, the registry of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (“ITAT” for short) has stated that the appeal filed by the assessee is time barred by 112 days. During appellate proceedings in ITAT, the assessee submitted, vide written submissions filed at the time of hearing on 05/03/204, that Hon'ble Supreme Court, vide order dated 10/01/2022 in Misc. Application No. 21 of 2022 had excluded the COVID-19 period for the purpose of calculation of limitation period. It was further stated therein that the service of order of learned Pr. CIT, and filing of the present appeal in ITAT, both happened within the period excluded for calculation of limitation vide aforesaid order dated 10/01/2022 of Hon'ble Supreme Court. In view of the foregoing, the learned Authorised Representative for the assessee submitted that this appeal should not be treated as barred by limitation, and should be heard on merits. The learned CIT (D.R.) expressed no objection to this. In view of the aforesaid, we are treating this appeal to be in order Assessment Year:2020-21 3 and not barred by limitation. We are accordingly admitting this appeal and we proceed to decide this appeal on merits.

(B.2) The only issue in this appeal is regarding approval not granted to the assessee u/s 10(23C) of IT Act for assessment year 2020-21. The learned Authorised Representative for the assessee submitted that the learned Pr. CIT should have granted approval for assessment year 2020-21 also. She submitted that the assessee had submitted application well before the prescribed date of 30th September 2020. Drawing our attention to the paper book filed from the assessee’s side, she highlighted that the application was made on 25/09/2020. She further submitted that having regard to prevailing law at the relevant time, the assessee should have got aforesaid approval u/s 10(23C) of IT Act from assessment year 2020-21 also. On perusal of the impugned order dated 09/07/2021 of learned Pr. CIT, we find that the learned Pr. CIT has not stated any reason whatsoever for not granting approval for assessment year 2020-21. In this regard the learned CIT (D.R.) for the Revenue, contended that the matter should be set aside to the file of Pr. CIT with the direction to examine assessee’s case for approval for assessment year 2020-21. The learned Authorised Representative for assessee expressed no objection this.

(B.2.1) In view of the foregoing, we are setting aside the matter regarding assessee’s claim for approval u/s 10(23C) of IT Act, for assessment year 2020-21, to the file of learned Pr. CIT with the direction to examine assessee’s claim for approval for assessment year 2020-21 in the light of applicable law at the relevant time and relevant facts and circumstances of the case; after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Assessment Year:2020-21 4 assessee. With these directions, all the grounds of appeal are treated as disposed of.

(C) In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

(Order pronounced in the open court on 19/03/2024)