EARTH FOCUS FOUNDATION,NAGPUR V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, PUNE

ITA 365/NAG/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Earth Focus Foundation, which appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Pune, concerning the rejection of their application for regular approval of registration under section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal was heard by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Nagpur Bench. The grounds of the appeal included objections to the rejection of the application based on timing and technical breaches, as well as the non-application of a CBDT Circular that extended the due date for such applications. However, during the hearing, the assessee decided not to pursue the appeal further.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 24283 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANDIPKUMAR SALUNKE
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJESH LOYA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 80G

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.365/Nag./2023 (Assessment Year : 2021–22) Earth Focus Foundation House no.245, Rajlzxmi Marg Civil Lines, Nagpur 440 001 PAN – AAFCE5947C ……………. Appellant v/s Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemp.) Pune ……………. Respondent Assessee by : Shri Rajesh Loya Revenue by : Shri Sandipkumar Salunke Date of Hearing – 16/12/2024 Date of Order – 08/01/2025 O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M. Aforesaid appeal by the assessee is against the impugned order dated 21/09/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Pune, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2021–22. 2. In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:– “1 Ground No. 1 That the order in Form 10AD passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemptions, Pune rejecting regular approval of registration under section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is bad in law and wrong on facts. 2. Ground No. 2 That the learned CIT erred in law and on facts in rejecting the application for regular approval of registration u/s. 80G, holding that the same is not filed within the time limit allowed under clause (iii) to first proviso of section 80G(5). 2 Earth Focus Foundation On the facts and circumstances of the case-the action of the application is filed within 6 months of commencement of substantial charitable activities. The contention of Id. CIT is improper and unjustified. 3. Ground No. 3 That the application in Form 10AB for regular approval u/s. 80G was made before expiry of provisional approval granted. On the facts and circumstances of the case the action of the learned CIT is improper and unjustified. 4. Ground No. 4 That the learned CIT erred in law and on facts in rejecting the application for registration due to an alleged technical breach without going into the merits of the case. On facts and circumstances, the activities of the company were genuine, charitable and in accordance with the objects of Memorandum of Association. The action of CIT is against the principles of natural justice and uncalled for. 5. Ground No.5 That the learned CIT, Exemptions erred in law and on facts in holding that CBDT Circular No.6/2023 dated 24-05-2023 extending the due date to 30-9-2023 is not applicable for application made under clause (iii) to first proviso to section 80G(5). 6. Ground No. 6 Without prejudice to Ground Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 raised above, the CIT, Exemptions has erred in not condoning the delay in making application u/s. 80G(5)(iii). On the facts and circumstances of the case, it was a case of genuine hardship and there was a reasonable cause for delay in making application and the CIT was bound to take cognizance of same. The action of the learned CIT is improper and unjustified.” 7. Ground No. 7 That for any other ground with kind permission of Hon'ble members at the time of hearing of appeal. 3. During the course of hearing, the learned Authorised Representative, appearing for the assessee submitted that he did not wish to press this appeal, to which, the learned Departmental Representative did not raise any objection. Consequently, we treat this appeal as withdrawn. 4. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open Court on 08/01/2025 Sd/- K.M. ROY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sd/- V. DURGA RAO JUDICIAL MEMBER NAGPUR, DATED: 08/01/2025 3 Earth Focus Foundation Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Nagpur; and (5) Guard file. True Copy By Order Pradeep J. Chowdhury Sr. Private Secretary Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Nagpur "