← All Phrases

“Section 119(2)”

Section References (mined)Section 119Section 119(2)554 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 119(2) is Commissioner of Customs v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (267 ITR 272), cited in 501 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 119(2)

Commissioner of Customs v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
267 ITR 272 · 2004 · Supreme Court
501
citing judgments

CBDT and CBEC circulars, along with administrative instructions, are binding on departmental authorities, who must not act in contravention of them. However, these circulars and instructions are not binding on courts or assessees.

UCO Bank v. CIT
237 ITR 889 · 1999 · Supreme Court
486
citing judgments

CBDT circulars and instructions, while not binding on courts or assessees, are strictly binding on income-tax departmental authorities, who cannot act in contravention of them.

Gajanan Constructions v. DCIT
74 Taxmann.com 6 · 2016 · ITAT
465
citing judgments

Late fees under section 234E can only be levied prospectively from June 1, 2015. Levying late fees for periods prior to this date is not permissible.

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).

Setty & Others vs. State of Karnataka (7) (1996) 1 SCC 345- Secretary Government of Madras v. P.R. Sriramulu
4 SCC 720 · 2008 · Reported
145
citing judgments

The validity of Section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961, inserted by the Finance Act, 2012, is examined by the court.

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.

Judgments citing Section 119(2)

Kreate Konnect E Solutions Private Limited, Vadodara vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1950/AHD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2020-21 Kcreate Konnect E Solutions Dy. Cit, Cir.1(1)(1) Private Limited Vs. Vadodara. 291M 2Bd Floor, Green Villa-11 B/H. Abs Tower Old Padra Road Vadodara Pan : Aagck 1493 C (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Jigar Adhyaru, Ar Assessee By : Shri Hargovind Singh, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/07/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Makarand V.Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 5, Chennai [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”] Dated 18.09.2024, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2020– 21, Whereby The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Intimation Issued Under Section 143(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”] Dated 18.12.2021 Was Dismissed.

For Appellant: Shri Hargovind Singh, Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(1)

caused to domestic companies due to procedural lapses in filing Form 10-IC for A.Y. 2020–21. In exercise of its powers under section 119(2)(b), the Board directed that delay in filing Form 10-IC be condoned, provided three conditions are satisfied: a. The return

Bastuhara Sahayata Samiti, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 1(2)(Exemption), Kolkata

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

ITA 444/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 444/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Bastuhara Sahayata Samiti,……………….…Appellant 27/1B, Bidhan Sarani, Srimini Market, Kolkata-700006, West Bengal [Pan:Aaatb7422R] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………..Respondent Ward-1(2), (Exemption), Kolkata, Office Of The Income Tax Officer, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsian, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Somnath Das Biswas, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: May 20, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 28, 2025 O R D E R

Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

delay in submission of Form 10 before the ld. CIT(Exemption), Kolkata which was rejected by the ld. CIT vide order under section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act dated 20.12.2018. It was noted that the claim has not mentioned in the ITR 7 and in the resolution ... Rules w.e.f. 01.04.2016 relevant to A.Y. 2016-17. For better appreciation, the said CBDT Circular is reproduced below: “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 1.Under the provisions

Mohammed Gyasuddin, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 30(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1053/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jul 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyi.T.A. No. 1053/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Mohammed Gyasuddin,…………………………Appellant 3, Dent Mission Road, Kolkata-700023, West Bengal [Pan:Afvpg2465H] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………….……….....Respondent Ward-30(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, Dakshin, 2, Gariahat Road, Kolkata-700031 Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Abhijit Adhikari, Jcit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: July 22, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 25, 2025 O R D E R

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

Mohammed Gyasuddin statutory powers under section 119 of the Act which are binding on the authorities in the administration of the Act. Under section 119(2)(a), however, the circulars as contemplated therein cannot be adverse to the assessee. The power is given for the purpose of just, proper

V.C. Medical, Educational and Charitable Trust, Palani vs. ITO, Ward-1, Dindigul

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

ITA 1114/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1114/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 V.C. Medical, Educational & Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Charitable Trust, 72-B, Dindugal Ward 1, Road, Palani 624 601. Dindigul. [Pan:Aaatv4282H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 10.01.2025 Passed By The Addl/Jcit(A)-3, Mumbai For The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 21 Days. The Assessee Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons. Upon Hearing Both The Parties & On Examination Of The Said Affidavit, We Find The Reasons Stated By The Assessee Are Bonafide, Which Really

For Appellant: Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.AFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 154

submits that the delay condonation petition dated 16.11.2024 was allowed by the ld. CIT(E) condoning the delay in filing Form 10B under section 119(2)(b) of the Act and referred to enclosure 1. He submits that the assessee is entitled for 3 I.T.A. No.1114/Chny/25 exemption under section

T.T.92.Kadayanallur P.U. Area Teachers Co - Op Thrift Credit Society, Tenkasi vs. ITO, Ward-1, Tirunelveli

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

ITA 1352/CHNY/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri G. Reddi Prakash, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee submitted that a petition for condonation of delay in filing the return of income under section 119(2)(b) of the Act has already been filed and ITA No.1352/Chny/2025 TT 92 Kadayanallur PU Area Teachers Co-op. Thrift Credit Society is pending before

Subhendu Nandy, Burdwan vs. I.T.O., Ward - 2(2), Burdwan

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2022/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jul 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Subhendu Nandy Ito, Wd 2(2), Burdwan C/O S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Aaykar Bhavan, Burdwan, Advocates Sagar Mansion, 2. Kachari Road, Court Compound, Garstin Place, 2 Nd Floor, Suite P.O. & P.S. Burdwan, Dist. Vs. Nos, 202 & 203, Hare Street, Purba, Bardhaman-713101, Kolkata-700001, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aegpn0674P Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ruchika Sharma, Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ruchika Sharma, DR
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 69A

statutory powers under section 119 of the Act which are binding on the authorities in the administration of the Act. Under section 119(2)(a), ITA No. 2022 KOL 2024 Subhendu Nandy; A.Y. 2017-18 however, the circulars as contemplated therein cannot be adverse to the assessee. The power

Rani Channamma Co-Operative Credit Society Limited, Haveri vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Haveri

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

ITA 826/BANG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Siddhesh Nagraj Gaddi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate, Standing
Section 119(2)(b)Section 139Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80ASection 80P

claim and rejected the deduction without proper verification. The assessee relied on CBDT Circular No. 13/2023 which supports condonation of delay under section 119(2)(b) of the Act and allows genuine claims to be considered. Accordingly, the assessee earnestly prayed that the learned CIT(A) may kindly consider

Jan Seva Mandal, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Exemption Ward -1(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statisti...

ITA 3445/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2023-24 Jan Seva Mandal, Central Processing Centre Income Vinayalaya, Mahakali Caves Tax Deparment, Bengaluru, Vs. Road, Andheri (East), Income Tax Officer Exemption Mumbai-400093. Ward 1(4), Mumbai. 6Th Floor, Mtnl Te Building, Pedder Road, Mumbai-400026. Pan No. Aaatj 4868 K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Ketan PatelFor Respondent: Mr. Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)

Chief Commissioner for condonation of delay Commissioner or Chief Commissioner for condonation of delay Commissioner or Chief Commissioner for condonation of delay under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act. under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act. The relevant finding of the Ld. nt finding ... guidelines regarding the condonation of delay in compliance with guidelines regarding the condonation of delay in compliance with any provision of the Act. Section 119(2) reads as follows: any provision of the Act. Section 119(2) reads as follows: any provision of the Act. Section 119(2) reads

Dd122 Harur & Pr Patti Tk Ghss &Ghs Employees Co-Op. Thrift & Credit Society, Dharmapuri vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Dharmapuri

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1333/CHNY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1333/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2022-23 V. Dd 122 Harur & Pr Patti Tk Ghss & The Ito, Ghs Employees Co-Op. Thrift & Ward-1, Credit Society, Dharmapuri. 1/16,Kanikaran Kottai, Sikkampatti V. Muthampatti Veppilaimithempatti, Dharmapuri-636 903. [Pan: Aadah 1485 L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15.07.2025 : घोषणाक"तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 21.07.2025

For Appellant: Mr.T.S. LakshmiFor Respondent: Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam
Section 119(2)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80P

raised by the assessee. On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. By filing copy of the application under section 119(2) of the Act, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee has filed a condonation petition 13.07.2025 before the CBDT under ... section 119(2) of the Act to condone the delay in filing the return of income u/s 139(1). 6. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the materials available on record and gone through paper book, the orders of authorities below. In this case, since the return of income

Ankur Dealcom Private Limited, Kolkata vs. PCIT, Kolkata - 2, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 197/KOL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Ankur Dealcom Private Limited Pcit, Room No. 302 & 303, Sikkim Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, Commerce House, 4/1, Middleton Chowringhee Square, Vs. Street, Kolkata-700071, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aahca2847F Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ruchika Sharma, Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ruchika Sharma, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263Section 68

statutory powers under section 119 of the Act which are binding on the authorities in the administration of the Act. Under section 119(2)(a), however, the circulars as contemplated therein cannot be adverse to the assessee. The power is given for the purpose of just, proper and efficient management

Ashok Kumar Agarwal and Ors HUF, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle - 34, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jul 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Ashok Kumar Agarwal & Ors Huf Acit, Circle 34, C/O S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Aaykar Bhavan Poorva, Advocates 2, Garstin Place, 2 Nd 110, Shanti Pally, 7 Th Floor, Vs. Floor, Suite No.203, Off Hare Eastern Metropolitian By Pass, Street, Kolkata-700001, Kolkata-700107, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaeha8352F Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Amuldeep Kaur, Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Amuldeep Kaur, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

statutory powers under section 119 of the Act which are binding on the authorities in the administration of the Act. Under section 119(2)(a), however, the circulars as contemplated therein cannot be adverse to the assessee. The power is given for the purpose of just, proper and efficient management

The Dharapuram Agricultural Producers Cooperative Marketing Society Limited, Tirupur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(4) Tirupur, Tirupur

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

ITA 1270/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1270/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 The Dharapuram Agricultural Producers Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Cooperative Marketing Society Limited, Ward 2(4), New No. 487, Old No. 280, Tirupur. Chinnakadai Street, Opp. Arasamaram Stop, Dharapuram, Tiruppur 638 702. [Pan:Aabat8601Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. A. Vijayalakshmi, Ca (Virtual) ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. V. Supraja, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 13.03.2025 Passed By The Addl./Jcit(A)-1, Visakhapatnam For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The Assessee Raised 4 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A)

For Appellant: Ms. A. Vijayalakshmi, CA (virtual)For Respondent: Ms. V. Supraja, Addl.CIT
Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 80ASection 80P

Nadu Co- operative Societies Act, the ld. CCIT condoned the delay in filing the return of income vide his order dated 28.03.2025 under section 119(2)(b) of the Act. 5. The ld. AR submits that with regard to the delay in filing the appeal before

Oorissa Evangelist Trust Association, Cuttack vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Cuttack

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 199/CTK/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Orissa Evangelistic Trust Ito, Exemption Ward, Cuttack Association, Aaykar Bhavan, Shelter Chhak At-Kesharpur, Buxi Bazar, Tulsipur, Cuttack, Vs. Cuttack-753001 Odisha-753008 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaato0708P Assessee By : Shri Sk Sarangi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Nishanth Rao B, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri SK Sarangi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Nishanth Rao B, DR
Section 11Section 119(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 143(1)

other hand, Id. Departmental Representative submits that the assessee ought to have filed the condonation petition before the revenue authorities under section 119(2)(b) of the Act as directed by the CBDT vide Circular No 16/2024 dated 18.11.2024. The assessee has a remedy to approach the authorities under section

Indira Gandhi Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Bhubaneswar vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Bhubaneswar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 509/CTK/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Income Tax Officer, Exemption Indira Gandhi Institute Of Ward, Bhubaneswar, Pharmaceutical Sciences Pratyaksha Kar Bhawan, Third N-4/208 Nayapalli, Irc Village, Floor, Regional Telecom Trg Vs. Khorda, Odisha-751015 Centre, Vss Nagar Road, Bhubaneswar-751007 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaati7724B Assessee By : Shri Kc Jena, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri KC Jena, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty
Section 11Section 119(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 143(1)

other hand, Id. Departmental Representative submits that the assessee ought to have filed the condonation petition before the revenue authorities under section 119(2)(b) of the Act as directed by the CBDT vide Circular No 16/2024 dated 18.11.2024. The assessee has a remedy to approach the authorities under section

Lalbagh Christian Educational Society, Lucknow vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 104/LKW/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow10 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudharyआयकर अपील सं/ Ita No.104/Lkw/2025 ननिाारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2022-23 Lalbagh Christian Educational V. The Commissioner Of Society Income Tax (Exemption) Lal Bagh, Lucknow-226001. 5Th Floor, Tc-46, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Next To Lohia Hospital, Indra Nagar, Luckow-226010. Pan:Aaatl2080P अपीलार्थी/(Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी/(Respondent) अपीलार्थी कक और से/Appellant By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Adv प्रत्यर्थी कक और से /Respondent By: Shri Amit Kumar, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई कक तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07 07 2025 घोर्णा कक तारीख/ Date Of 10 07 2025 Pronouncement: O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 119(2)(b)

appeal of the assessee overlooking the issue of condonation of delay caused in filing Form No. 10B, such delay being condonable as per section 119(2)(b), petition for which is pending adjudication before the CIT(Exemptions), the order passed by the CIT(A) be set aside. 2. Because

Govindasamy Bharathiraja, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-4(2), Chennai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 258/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.258/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. Mr. Govindasamy Bharathiraja, The Ito, Old 4, New 6, Balaji Colony, Non-Corporate Ward-4(2), 3Rd Cross Street, Velachery, Chennai. Chennai-600 042. [Pan: Albpb 2971 K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143Section 144Section 69Section 69A

with law. The statute does not indicate vesting a jurisdiction in the Board to issue instructions in excess of what is stated in section 119(2)(b). It is wellsettled that instructions/circulars/guidelines are binding to the extent they are not inconsistent with the provisions

Suvarna Arogya Suraksha Trust, Bengaluru vs. ACIT, Exemptions Circle - 1, Bangalore

ITA 947/BANG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Deepak, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL

Indravati Devi Bagrodia Charitable Trust, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 1.1, Exemption, Kolkata

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 491/KOL/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Jul 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: The Itat The Grounds Are Extracted For Reference: “1. For That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Ao Was Wrong And

Section 11Section 143(1)Section 250

case took note of the latter circular issued by the Board in Circular No. 16 of 2022 dated 19- 07-2022 issued under Section 119(2)(b) by which the powers delegated to the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax/Commissioner of Income Tax to condone the delay in filing Form

Mangal Tirth Estate Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Ward-4(1), Chennai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 30/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:30/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Mangal Tirth Estate Ltd., Income Tax Officer, 769, Spencer Plaza, Anna Salai, Vs. Corporate Ward- 4(1), Mount Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 002. [Pan:Aaacm-4614-R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. N. V. Balaji, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Anitha, Addl. C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14.05.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Filed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeal, Addl/ Jcit (A)-4, Hyderabad, For The Assessment Year 2020-21, Vide Order Dated 07.11.2024. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Company Filed Its Return Of Income For The A.Y.2020-21 On 17.11.2020 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.11,20,57,920/-. The Return Of Income Was Processed By The Ao, Cpc, Bangalore On 29.12.2021 & Raised A Demand Of Rs.93,79,350/- By Denying The Beneficial Tax Rate As Per Section 115Baa Of The Act & By Applying The Tax Rate Of 30%.

For Appellant: Shri. N. V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl. C.I.T
Section 115BSection 119(2)(b)Section 154

enquiry was directed towards whether there is any justification for the delay in filing the Form 10-IC. The need to invoke Section 119(2)(b) of the Act, itself would arise only if there is a delay and the enquiry ought to be whether that delay ... deal with the same on merit. The facts narrated supra leaves no room for doubt that the 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 cause

M/S. Ooruni Foundation, Chennai vs. CIT, Exemptions, Chennai

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

ITA 688/CHNY/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.S. Prince Simon, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)(iii)

Chairman, Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), Ministry of Finance, Delhi. Respected Sir/Madam, Sub: Petition for condonation of delay under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Delay in filing Form 10AB for registration under Section 12AA - Reg. Ref: PAN-AAAT05611R As advised by my client