9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 81X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he claim of the assessee in accordance with law by carrying out necessary verification of form 10B filed by the assessee. AO shall take form 10B on record and verify the exemption claimed u/s. 11 in accordance with law. Needless to say that proper opportunity of being heard must be granted to assessee in accordance with law. Grounds raised by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appellant's case. 6. Without prejudice to the right to seek waiver with the Hon'ble CCIT/DG, the appellant denies itself liable to be charged to interest u/s. 234B and 234C of the Act, which under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and the same deserves to be cancelled. 7. For the above and other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing of the appeal, your appellant humbly prays that the appeal may be allowed and Justice rendered and the appellant may be awarded costs in prosecuting the appeal and also order for the refund of the institution fees as part of the costs." 2. Brief facts of the case are as under: 2.1. Assessee is a trust constituted under the Deed of declaration of Trust date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar under consideration. The order u/s. 119(2)(B) of the act r.w.Rule 17B of IT Rules, 1962 was as under: "3. On perusal of submission of details, it is observed that:- (i) The Gross receipts for AY 2022-23 is 1,01,23,387/- for which CPC has raised a demand dt. 31.03.2023 for an amount of 48,02,410/-. (ii) The Assessee was registered U/s 12AA dt. 06.08.2020 and is registered u/s 12AB in Form 10AC dated 30.11.2022 (From AY 2022-23 to 2026-27). (iii) Assessee filed its Return of Income on 06.11.2022 (Due date: 07.11.2022) & Form 10B on 05.11.2022 (Due date: 07.10.2022) for A.Y. 2022-23. There is a delay of 29 days in filing Form 10B for A.Y. 2022-23. 4. Assessee has not furnished any valid reasons for delay in filing Form 108. After ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ued Circular No. 2/2020 [F.No. 197/55/2018-ITA-I], dated 03/01/2020 and a general Circular No. 16/2022 [F.No. 197/89/2022-ITA-I], dated 19/07/2022 wherein, direction was issued to admit the application of condonation of delay in filing form 10B for A.Y. 2018-19 or any subsequent years, wherein there is a delay of up to 365 days and to decide on merits. 5.1. It is submitted by the Ld.AR that these circulars were not considered either by the authority under the provisions of section 119 of the act who dismissed the application for condonation of delay in filing Form 10B, or by the Ld.CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal for non-condonation of delay in filing the appeal, though assessee was pursuing alternative remedy under law. She submitted that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n u/s. 143(1)(a) and, when the requirement of law are complied with, exemption u/s. 11 cannot be denied. The Ld.AR has placed decisions observing this principle in the paper book compilation, however reliance was placed by the Ld.AR on paras 18-19 of the decision of Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in case of M/s. Arham Mitra Mandal vs. ITO in ITA No. 1110/Bang/2023 vide order dated 27/06/2024 that reads as under: "18. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. There are some factual errors in the order of the CIT(A). In the impugned order of the CIT(A) at page 13, it has been stated that that the return of income was not filed by the assessee within the prescribed due date. In this regard, we notice that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5) ELT 437 (SC) had held as follows: "The mere fact that it is statutory does not matter one way or the other. There are conditions and conditions. Some may he substantive, mandatory and based on considerations of policy and some others may merely belong to the area of procedure. It will be erroneous to attach equal importance to the non-observance of all conditions irrespective of the purposes they were intended to serve." 8.1. The Ld.AR also relied on the following decisions: • Decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Al Jamia Mohammediyah Education Society vs. CIT(E) reported in [2024] 162 taxmann.com 114 • Decision of Hon'ble Ahmedabad Tribunal in case of Shiksha Foundation vs. ITO (Exemption) reported in [2024] ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
