“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

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

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)

Mohali Education Society, Mohali vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemptions, Chandigarh

Appeal stand dismissed as being not maintainable

ITA 511/CHANDI/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.511/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) M/S Mohali Education Society Cit (Exemptions) बनाम/ Vs. Opp. H.No.652, Phase-X Chandigarh Mohali – 160062 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaatm-6973-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Om Datt Sharma (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Bharat Bhushan Garg (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-11-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10-11-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aggrieved By Rejection Of An Application (Seeking Condonation Of Delay In Filing Form 10B) As Filed By The Assessee U/S 119(2)(B) For Assessment Year (Ay) 2020-21 Vide Impugned Order Dated 21-03-2025 As Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh, The Assessee Is In Further Appeal Before Us. The Ld. Cit-Dr, At The Outset, Pleaded That This Order Is Not An Appealable Order Before Tribunal In Terms

For Appellant: Shri Om Datt Sharma (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Bhushan Garg (CIT) – Ld. DR

Section 119(2)(b)Section 253

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH HYBRID HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT

The Farmer Bank Staff Co-Operative Society Ltd, Fort, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Piramal Chambers

ITA 5686/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Sushant Alme, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, Ld. Sr. D.R

Section 119(2)(b)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 80ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRABHASH

Bible Fellowship Centre Wagholi, Pune vs. ITO, Exemption, Ward-1(2), Pune

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as per the terms indicated above

ITA 1887/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri B.C. MalakarFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80G

filing of Form No.10/9A for A.Y. 2016-17 and the same reads as under : “Sub: Condonation of delay under section 119(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in filing of Form no. 10 and Form No. 9A for AY 2016-17 Under the provisions of section ... been requested that the delay in filing of Form No. 9A and Form No.10 for AY 2016-17 may be condoned under section 119(2) (b) of the Act 5. Accordingly, in supersession of earlier Circular/Instruction issued in this regard, with a view to expedite the disposal of applications filed

Cheyutha for Wellbeing Foundation, Ranga Reddy vs. CIT (Exemption), Hyderabad

ITA 1227/HYD/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Oct 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Us:

Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)

regular registration under Section 80G of the Act, but the assessee trust remains at liberty to approach the CBDT for 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 for regular

Sayegh Paint Factories India Private Limited, Ernakulam vs. Corporate Cir 2(1), Kochi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the stay petition is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 451/COCH/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Snr.AR

Section 144B(6)(vii)Section 148Section 271BSection 273BSection 44A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH : COCHIN BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K

P D Memorial Trust, Delhi vs. Dlc-Ca-2, Range- 48, Ward Exemp 2(4), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3784/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Orchid Corp, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 1(1)(1), Surat

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

ITA 1119/SRT/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1119/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2021-22) (Hybrid Hearing) Orchid Corp., Vs. Ito, F-11, Orchid Ventura, Nr. New Lp Ward - 1(1)(1), Savani School, Palanpore Canal Surat Road, Surat - 395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaffo2395F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Suresh K. Kabra, Ca Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 31/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/10/2025

Section 10B(8)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 80ASection 80I

delay in filing the return is condoned by the competent income-tax authority in terms of provisions of section 119(2)(b) of the Act. The CIT(A) is not the competent authority, which is clear from the language of section 119(2)(b) of the Act. Hence

Leader People Service Charitable Trust, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption Ward), Visakhapatnam

ITA 471/VIZ/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.471/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: Na) Leader People Service Vs. The Income Tax Officer Charitable Trust, (Exemption Ward), Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aabtl4868N (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Sri Badicala Yadagiri, Cit- Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 29/10/2025 Pronouncement: O R D E R "ित रवीश सूद, जे.एम./Per Ravish Sood, J.M. The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Trust Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(Exemptions)”], Hyderabad, Dated 17.06.2025 Rejecting Its Application Filed In “Form No. 10Ab” For Regular Registration Under Section 80G(5) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”). The Assessee

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri Badicala Yadagiri, CIT-

Section 80GSection 80G(5)

Charitable Trust vs. ITO (Exemption Ward) of the Act, but, the assessee trust remains at liberty to approach the CBDT for 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

Cp Reddy Charitable Trust, Rajahmundry vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Hyderabad

ITA 470/VIZ/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.470/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: Na) C P Reddy Charitable Vs. Commissioner Of Income Trust, Tax (Exemption), Rajahmundry. Hyderabad. Pan: Aabtc3393F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Smt. V. Krishna Kumari, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Sri Badicala Yadagiri, Cit- Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 29/10/2025 Pronouncement: O R D E R "ित रवीश सूद, जे.एम./Per Ravish Sood, J.M. The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Trust Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(Exemptions)”], Hyderabad, Dated 17.06.2025 Rejecting Its Application Filed In “Form No. 10Ab” For Regular Registration Under Section 80G(5) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”). The Assessee

For Appellant: Smt. V. Krishna KumariFor Respondent: Sri Badicala Yadagiri, CIT-

Section 80GSection 80G(5)

regular registration under Section 80G of the Act, but, the assessee trust remains at liberty to approach the CBDT for 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 for regular

Rural Development Foundation, Anand vs. CPC, Bengaluru Juris. AO- the ITO, Ward-Exemption, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 927/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.927/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2019-20 Rural Development Cpc, Bengaluru बनाम/ Foundation Juris.Ao – The Ito Ward- V/S. Aitc, 2Nd Floor Exemption Narayan Complex Vadodara – 390 007 Nr.Shubh Laxmi Shopping Centre Station Road Anand – 388 001 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabtr 1090 C (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Arti N. Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rameshwar P. Meena, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/10/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 21/02/2025 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2019-2020. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Rural Development Foundation Vs. Cpc, Bengaluru Juris Ao The Ito, Ward-Exemption Asst. Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Ms. Arti N. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P. Meena, Sr.DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

condonation of delay or relaxation of statutory conditions. The appellate authority further noted that the Act provides a specific remedy under section 119(2)(b) empowering the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) to condone delay in filing returns or audit reports, and directed the assessee to approach the competent

Volark Leasing Ifsc Pvt. Ltd, Gujarat vs. ACIT/DCIT, Circle, Gandhinagar, Gujarat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 357/AHD/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Oct 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt. Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Shri Pancham Sethi, ARFor Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 250Section 80Section 80JSection 80L

application or claim and deal with the same on merits in accordance with law.” 4.5 It is evident from the CBDT Circulars and Section 119(2)(b) that the Assessing Officer (AO), Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [JCIT(A)], and Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals ... have the authority under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act to grant condonation for the delay in filing Form 10CCF. 4.6 The appellant has the option to approach the jurisdictional Commissioner of Income Tax, Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, or Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax for the condonation

Triloknath Vatsalya Vatika, Gandhinagar vs. The Dy.CIT, CPC, Bangalore Present Jao- the ITO, Ward-1 (Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1092/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1092/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Triloknath Vatsalya Vatika The Dy.Cit बनाम/ At Balva Cpc Bangalore. V/S. Nr. Tahuko Hotel Present Jao Kalol The Ito Ward-1(Exemption) Gandhinagar – 382 001 Ahmedabad-380 015 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aants 5604 B (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kushal Fofaria, Ar Revenue By : Shri R.P. Rastogi, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/10/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 10/03/2025 Passed By The Office Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeal Addl/Jcit(A)-Gwalior [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”), For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Kushal Fofaria, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-DR

Section 11Section 119(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 44A

condonation of delay in filing Form 10B up to three years by the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner of Income-tax under section 119(2)(b) of the Act, and observed that the assessee had not sought such condonation from the competent authority. The CIT(Appeals) held that neither

Aurojeeva Trust, Puducherry vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemptions Ward 1, Chennai

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

ITA 2246/CHNY/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2246/Chny/2025

For Appellant: Shri V. Meenakshi Sundar, C.A =>For Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT

Section 119(2)(b)Section 80GSection 80G(5)(ii)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी जॉज" जॉज" के, उपा

Hcg Tvh Medical Imaging Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Ward-2(3), Chennai

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

ITA 2239/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2238 & 2239/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Hcg Tvh Medical Imaging The Income Tax Officer, Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Corporate Ward 2(3), No.150, P. Kalinga Road, Chennai Purasawakkam, Chennai – 600 084 Pan: Aacch 1276L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri P.M. Kathir, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.10.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.10.2025

For Appellant: Shri P.M. Kathir, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT

Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)Section 250

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी जॉज" जॉज

Hcg Tvh Medical Imaging Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Ward-2(3), Chennai

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

ITA 2238/CHNY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri P.M. Kathir, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT

Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)Section 250

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी जॉज" जॉज

Hewlett Packard Financial Services (India) P. Ltd, Bangalore vs. Asst CIT Cir 2(1)(2), Bangaluru

Accordingly, the ground is dismissed as not pressed

ITA 915/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 41

assessee, authorise any income tax authority to admit any such application or claim after expiry of the period specified under the Act. Section 119(2)(b) is reproduced as under: "the Board may, if it considers it desirable or expedient so to do for avoiding genuine hardship in any case

Medip Healthtech Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1069/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2020-21 M/S.Medip Healthtech Pvt. Ltd. The Dcit, Sf-210, Devashish Business Park Vs. Cir.2(1)(1) Nr.Popular Domeinn, Satellite Vejalpur Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan : Aakcm 0291 J (Applicant) (Responent) : Ms.Vinata Bhura, Ar Assessee By : Shri Veerabadram Vislavath, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/10/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/10/2025

For Appellant: Shri Veerabadram Vislavath, Sr.DR

Section 115BSection 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 30Section 43B

course of hearing before us, the Authorised Representative (AR) reiterated the above facts and further submitted that the assessee filed an application under section 119(2)(b) before the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Ahmedabad, seeking condonation of delay in filing Form ... direction to recompute the tax at the concessional rate of 22% under section 115BAA after taking into consideration the condonation granted under section 119(2)(b). 3.2 The Departmental Representative (DR) fairly submitted that he had no objection if the matter is restored to the Assessing Officer for verification

Seva Bharathi, Hyderabad vs. CIT., Exemption Ward 1(4), Hyderabad

In the result, ITA.No.1307/Hyd

ITA 365/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.365 & 1307/Hyd/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year 2022-2023 Seva Bharathi, The Commissioner Of Hyderabad – 500 018. Income Tax Vs. Telangana. (Exemptions), Ward-1(4), Pan Aayts5233K Hyderabad – 500 004. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca Sri Harsha राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 08.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 15.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao:

For Appellant: CA Sri HarshaFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 250

that, the delay in filing of Form 10B was due to ill medical health of the accountant. This constitutes a reasonable cause under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in not giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard ... 2) on the ground that the audit report was not filed. 5.6. The tribunal further committed an error in appreciating the import of section 119 2(b) of the Act inasmuch as the application contemplated thereunder is only additional remedy for the assessee which could not be said

Seva Bharathi, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Exemption Ward 1(4), Hyderabad

In the result, ITA.No.1307/Hyd

ITA 1307/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

For Appellant: CA Sri HarshaFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 250

M.N. Chickkanna Chettiar Trust, Tiruppur vs. ACIT (Exemptions), Coimbatore

In the result the appeal of the assessee for the A

ITA 1568/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. T.Banusekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Kavitha, Addl. C.I.T

Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 234BSection 250

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एबी ट