← All Phrases

“Section 119(2)(b)”

Section References (mined)Section 119Section 119(2)(b)679 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 119(2)(b) is CIT v. G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd. (376 ITR 456), cited in 221 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 119(2)(b)

CIT v. G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd.
376 ITR 456 · 2015 · Supreme Court
221
citing judgments

The requirement to file a certificate or form (e.g., Form 10CCB, 10-IC) along with the return of income for claiming a deduction (e.g., under sections 80-IB, 115BAA) is directory regarding its timing. Such a deduction is allowable if the requisite form is filed before the final order of assessment, as procedural requirements should not override substantive benefits.

CIT v. Gujarat Oil & Allied Industries
201 ITR 325 · 1993 · High Court
195
citing judgments

The requirement to file an audit report along with the income tax return, as specified in provisions like Section 80J(6A) or 80-IA(7), is directory and not mandatory. Substantial compliance is achieved if the audit report is submitted at any time before the assessment is framed or completed, and benefits should not be denied merely due to a delay in furnishing it.

PCIT v. Wipro Ltd.
140 Taxmann.com 223 · 2022 · Supreme Court
192
citing judgments

Exemption provisions under Chapter III, such as Section 10B(8), must be interpreted strictly, and any claim for such exemptions must be made in the return of income. The principles governing Chapter III (incomes not forming part of total income) differ from those for Chapter VIA (deductions in computing total income).

CIT v. Contimeters Electricals (P.) Ltd.
317 ITR 249 · 2009 · High Court
140
citing judgments

The requirement to file an audit report along with the return of income under section 80-IA(7) and similar provisions is directory, not mandatory. Such a report suffices if filed at any time before the assessment is framed.

Sarvodaya Charitable Trust v. ITO (Exemption)
125 Taxmann.com 75 · 2021 · High Court
129
citing judgments

The filing of Form 10B for claiming exemption under sections 11 and 12 is directory, not mandatory. A delay in filing Form 10B can be condoned, and exemption cannot be denied solely on this ground if the assessee satisfies other conditions and shows sufficient cause.

CIT v. Shivanand Electronics
209 ITR 63 · 1994 · High Court
100
citing judgments

The requirement to file an audit report along with the return of income for claiming specified deductions, such as under Section 80J or 80-IA, is directory and not mandatory. Such an audit report can be filed at any time before the assessment is framed or completed under Section 143(1).

Duggal & Co. v. CIT
220 ITR 456 · 1996 · High Court
84
citing judgments

An assessment order becomes erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue under Section 263 if the Assessing Officer fails to conduct a proper inquiry or investigation, even if the return appears prima facie correct. The Income-tax Officer has a duty to investigate and cannot remain passive.

AA520 Veerappampalayam Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
138 Taxmann.com 571 · 2022 · High Court
78
citing judgments

The Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) can deny deductions claimed under Chapter VI-A, such as Section 80P, during the processing of a return under Section 143(1) if conditions for claiming such deductions, including filing the return by the due date as per Section 80AC, are not met.

Judgments citing Section 119(2)(b)

Sahayog Charitable Society Regd., Delhi vs. ITO Ward-2(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1854/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Umeed Kuntal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)

COVID- 19 pandemic. Furthermore, the CBDT had issued a Circular No. 10/2022 dated 19.07.2022 for condonation of delay under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act for filing of Form No.10B for Assessment Year 2018-19 and subsequent years. 12. We find that it is not a case where

Kad Steel Rolling Mills, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2, TDS, Ashram Road

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 652/AHD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Divya Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajenkumar M Vasavda, Sr. DR
Section 119(2)(b)Section 201Section 201(1)

power to condone delays in the filing of statutory forms like Form No. 15G/H, since such powers lie only with the CBDT under section 119(2)(b) of the Act. Consequently, finding the AO’s action in line with the provisions of law, the CIT(A) upheld the order passed

Shri Sainath Sevabhavi Sanstha, Latur vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Nanded

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1319/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1319/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Shri Sainath Sevabhavi Vs. Ito, Exemption Ward, Sanstha, Nanded. Akharwai, Harangul Bk, Latur, Harangai Bk, B.O., Latur- 413531. Pan : Aakts9324H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sarang Gudhate Revenue By : Shri Akhilesh Srivastva Date Of Hearing : 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.08.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.04.2025 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-7, Delhi [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “(Without Prejudice To Each Other) 1. Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Has Erred In Not Condoning The Delay In Filing Of Appeal. 2. Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld Cit(A)/Nfac Has Erred In Denying The Expenditure Incurred & Treating The Gross Receipts As Income In Intimation U/S 143(1).

For Appellant: Shri Sarang GudhateFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastva
Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)Section 154

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

T1461 Koothanallur Pacb Ltd., Thiruvarur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Thiruvarur

In the result, the stay application filed by the assessee is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2195/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2195/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 & S.A. No. 73/Chny/2025 [In Ita No. 2195/Chny/2025] T1461 Koothanallur Pacb Ltd., Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Rep. By Its Secretary Mr. T. Ward 1, Singaravelu, No. 27, Big Nazaar Street, Thiruvarur. Koothanallur Post, Mannargudi Taluk, Thiruvarur 614 101. [Pan:Aacat6581C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. T.V. Paarkavi, Advocate For Shri J. Ashok, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C. Sivakumar, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 19.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.08.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 11.10.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2

For Appellant: Ms. T.V. Paarkavi, Advocate for Shri J. Ashok, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C. Sivakumar, Addl. CIT
Section 119(2)(b)Section 147

drew our attention to the copy of the petition for condonation of delay in filing return of income under section 119(2)(b) of the Act filed before the ld. CCIT, Madurai dated 25.03.2024 and prayed 4 I.T.A. No.2195/Chny/25 & S.A. No. 73/Chny/25 that suitable direction may be given ... assessee has placed copy of the petition for condonation of delay in filing return preferred before the ld. CCIT, Madurai dated 25.03.2024 under section 119(2)(b) of the Act, which is still pending for decision. We note that in this case, the delay in filing the return of income

Asha Charitable Trust, Hyderabad vs. CIT(Exemptions), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed being withdrawn

ITA 992/HYD/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Aug 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.992/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2024-25) Asha Charitable Trust Vs. Cit (Exemptions) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aaita8561G (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca I Vamsi Krishna राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 21/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 21/08/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: CA I Vamsi KrishnaFor Respondent: : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT(DR)
Section 119(2)(b)

ITA No 992 of 2025 Asha Charitable Trust आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE

Sevagramam Charitable Trust, Hyderabad vs. CIT (Exemption), Hyderabad

ITA 563/HYD/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Us:

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)

Form 10AB” for regular registration under Section 80G of the Act, but the assessee trust remains at liberty to seek the condonation under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act. Thereafter, the CIT(Exemptions) is directed to take up and dispose of the application filed by the assessee trust

Sevagramam Charitable Trust, Hyderabad vs. CIT (Exemption), Hyderabad

ITA 562/HYD/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Us:

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)

Form 10AB” for regular registration under Section 80G of the Act, but the assessee trust remains at liberty to seek the condonation under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act. Thereafter, the CIT(Exemptions) is directed to take up and dispose of the application filed by the assessee trust

Madhya Pradesh Rajya Van Vikas Nigam Limited, Tt Nagar vs. CPC Bangalore, Hobli

Appeal is allowed

ITA 62/IND/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 115BSection 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

companies in exercising the option u%~ 115BAA of the Act, the Central Board of Direct Taxes, in exercise of the powers conferred under section 119(2)(b) of the Act, hereby directs that: The delay in filing of Form 10-IC_ as per Rule 21AE of the Rules

Gujarat Technological University, Ahmedabad, Vadodara vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1 Exemptions, Ahmedabad, Gujarat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1187/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1187/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2019-10 Gujarat Technological University, The Dcit, Nr. Vishwakarma Govt. Engg. College, बनाम/ Circle-1, V/S. Near Visar Three Roads, Exemptions, Chandkheda Society Area S.O, Ahmedabad Gandhinagar, Ahmedabad-382424. (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaalg1109L अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Amrin Pathan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: ] ] This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)”] Dated 14.03.2025, For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2019–20, Arising Out Of The Rectification Order Passed By The Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc), Bengaluru, Under

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr-DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 154

Ahmedabad, on 05.02.2024 and before the CBDT on 12.02.2024. The CIT(E) rejected the condonation application vide order dated 16.02.2024 passed under section 119(2)(b). 8. The CIT(A) recorded that the sole issue in appeal was the rejection of the claim of exemption under section

Brahmos Realty Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 9(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 4119/MUM/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Aug 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.4119/Mum/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2024-25 Brahmos Realty Private Limited A-10002, Aristo Sappyhire, 2Nd Floor, Hasnabad Lane, Santakruz (W), Mumbai-400 054 (M.H) Pan: Aadcr5685C ...........अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(2)(1),Mumbai (M.H.) .......प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By Revenue By : Shri B.N Rao : Shri Aditya Rai, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing :13.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 19.08.2025 2 Brahmos Realty Private Limited Vs. Ito, Ward-9(2)(1)

For Respondent: Shri B.N Rao
Section 115BSection 115JSection 143(1)Section 250

file Form 10-IC within the period stipulated under Section 115BAA would cause genuine hardship to the assessee. Rejection of the petition under Section 119(2)(b) to permit the petitioner to file Form 10-IC in support of its exercise of option under Section 115BAA of the Act would

Muslim Education Institute Trust, Namlabal vs. Income Tax Officer Awrd- ( Exemptions), Jammu

The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 473/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member), SHRI UDAYAN DAS GUPTA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. G.Q. Wani (CA) –Ld.ARFor Respondent: Sh. K. Mehboob Ali Khan (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 154

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘DB’, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR HYBRID HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

K L D A V College, Roorkee, Haridwar vs. ITO Ward 1(3)(4), Roorkee, Haridwar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 226/DDN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun14 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 12A(1)(b)Section 139Section 140BSection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(ii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DEHRADUN BENCH: DEHRADUN BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

Singularity Labs Private Limited, Gandhinagar vs. The ITO, Ward-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 423/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2019-2020 Singularity Labs Private Limited Ito, Ward-4(1)(1) A Wing, Unit No.105 Vs. Ahmedabad- 380 Building No.1-A, Aqualine Properties 015. Pvt.Ltd. It/Ites Sez, Koba Gandhinagar – 382 421 Pan : Aaycs 8711 R (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Hardik Vora, Ar Assessee By : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13/08/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V.Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

action in denying the deduction in processing under section 143(1) of the Act. The CIT(A) further observed that under section 119(2)(b) of the Singularity Labs Pvt.Ltd. vs. ITO Asst.Year : 2019-20 4 Act, the power to condone the delay in filing such reports rests only with

Saumitra Kumar, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh vs. DCIT Circle 12, Pune, Maharashtra

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1520/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1520/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Saumitra Kumar, Vs. Dcit, Circle-12, Pune. Hig 111, Sector E, Aliganj, Lucknow- 226024. Pan : Bcmpk7370J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Naman Maloo (Virtual) Revenue By : Shri Amit Bobde Date Of Hearing : 23.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14.08.2025 : आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23.04.2025 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A), Indore [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In, Confirming The Action Of Ld. Ao(Cpc) In Disallowing The Credit Of Taxes Paid Outside India While Processing The Return Of Income (Foreign Tax Credit, "Ftc") Under Section 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. Such Rejection Is Beyond The Purview Of Section 143(1). The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Is Illegal & Arbitrary & Against The Facts Of The Case. Relief May Please

For Appellant: Shri Naman Maloo (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 90Section 91

above, it is apparent that unless there is an order condoning the delay in filing Form No. 67 by the PCIT under Section 119(2)(b), such Form No. 67 can't be taken into consideration and the relief u/s 90/90A cannot be allowed by the Appellate Authority even

St. Thomas Church, Mumbai vs. ITO Exemption Ward 2(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for the statistical purposes

ITA 296/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सुं./Ita No. 296/Mum/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2022-23) St Thomas Church V/S. Income Tax Officer 1, Church Road, बिाम (Exemptions) Ward 2(4), Goregaon (East), Mumbai Mumbai 400063 6Th Floor, Cumballa Hill, Mtnl Te Building, Pedder Road, Mumbai 400026. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaatt4878R Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवादी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By: Ms. Vasanti Patel-Adv राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel-AdvFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, CIT DR
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12A(1)(ac)Section 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 250

आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण न्यायपीठ, म ुंबई| IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL

Thrissur District NRI Service Co-Operative Society, Thrissur vs. Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Kochi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as premature

ITA 909/COCH/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 119(2)(b)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69ASection 80P(2)(a)

income for the assessment year in question and has since filed a petition before the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) under section 119(2)(b) of the Act, seeking condonation of delay for filing the return and requesting that the return be accepted. It was further submitted that ... brought to our notice that the assessee has now filed a return of income and simultaneously filed an application before the CBDT under section 119(2)(b) of the Act seeking condonation I.T.A. No.909/COCH/2024 Thrissur District NRI Service Co-operative Society of delay in filing the said return, which

Ambica Education Trust, Himatnagar vs. The ADIT, CPC Present Juris. the ITO, Exemption, Palanpur

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 799/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: DR. BRR KUMAR (Vice President), Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 143Section 143(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH Before: DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT And Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR

Ambica Education Trust, Himatnagar vs. The ADIT, CPC Present Juris. the ITO, Exemption, Palanpur

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 798/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. BRR KUMAR (Vice President), Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 143Section 143(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH Before: DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT And Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR

Unico Charitable Trust, Chennai vs. CIT, Exemptions, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1360/CHNY/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Aug 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1360/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2023-24 M/S. Unico Charitable Trust, The Commissioner Of No.4/173, Thulakanathamman Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions), Koil Street, Chennai. Surapet, Ambattur, Chennai – 600 066. Pan: Aabtu 0458P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. Parvatha Varthini, Cma ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. H. Kabila, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.08.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13.08.2025

For Appellant: Ms. Parvatha Varthini, CMAFor Respondent: Ms. H. Kabila, CIT
Section 119(2)(b)Section 80GSection 80G(5)(iii)

justice and that technicalities should not defeat meritorious claims. 5. The learned CIT (Exemptions) erred in not invoking the CBDT's powers under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act to condone the delay and consider the application on merits, especially when the genuineness of the Trust's activities ... files of the CIT(E) to await the decision of the Competent Authority on the condonation application filed in terms of section 119(2)(b) of the Act. 5. The Ld.DR supported the order of the CIT(E). 6. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record

Janki Wind Farm Developers Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(2)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1000/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri D.K. Parikh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Amit Pratap Singh, Sr.DR
Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

return filed by the assessee. He further held that since the mistake was in the return, the remedy, if any, lies under section 119(2)(b) of the Act, which empowers the Board to condone genuine claims made after expiry of due dates. As the assessee had not approached ... CBDT under section 119(2)(b), the CIT(A) concluded that the appeal was not maintainable. The appeal was accordingly dismissed. 3. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us raising following grounds of appeal: ITA No.1000/Ahd/2025 3 1. The Ld. National faceless Appeal