INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTION)WARD-1(4), DELHI V. MEHTA CHARITABLE PRAJNALAYA TRUST(REGD), DELHI

ITA 3267/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Income Tax Officer (Exemption), New Delhi against the decision of the CIT(A)/NFAC, which had reversed the CPC's rectification findings that rejected the assessee's application for section 11 exemption under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary contention was whether the CIT(A) erred in accepting the assessee's late filing of the Audit Report and the non-filing of an application for condonation of delay for filing Form 10B under section 119(2)(b). The Tribunal, referencing the case of CIT vs. Xavier Kelavani Mandal (P.) Ltd., concluded that the compliance with filing Form 10B was directory, thus supporting the assessee's eligibility for the exemption.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 473558 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Other Referred Cases: CIT vs. Xavier Kelavani Mandal (P.) Ltd., [2014] 41 taxmann.com 184 (Guj.)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DHEERAJ KUMAR JAIN
• Assessee Lawyers: K. SAMPATH
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 154; 11; 139(1); 10B

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.3267/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Income Tax Officer (Exemption), New Delhi, Delhi Vs. Mehta Charitable Prajnalaya Trust (Regd.), 104, Tilak Bazar, New Delhi PAN :AAAFM2171L (Appellant) (Respondent) ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2020-21, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1064925083(1), dated 16.05.2024 involving proceedings under section 154 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Assessee by Sh. K. Sampath, Adv. Sh. Rajkumar, Adv. Department by Sh. Dheeraj Kumar Jain, Sr. DR Date of hearing 20.01.2025 Date of pronouncement 20.01.2025 ITA No.3267/Del/2024 2 | P a g e 2. The Revenue raises following substantive grounds in the instant appeal: 1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT-(A), NFAC, has erred in accepting the fact that, condoning for late filling of Audit Report by the Ld. CIT(A) is beyond their jurisdictional power as per the Income Tax Act. 2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT-(A), NFAC, has erred in accepting the fact that, that the assessee has not filed application for condonation of delay for filing of Form 10B u/s 119(2)(b) before the Ld. CIT(E), till date. 3. Suffice to say, the Revenue’s sole substantive grievance raised in the instant appeal challenges the learned lower appellate authority’s action holding the assessee as eligible for section 11 exemption thereby reversing the CPC’s rectification findings rejecting its section 154 application to this effect. 4. Learned departmental representative vehemently argues that given the fact the assessee has not filed/uploaded its tax audit report in the prescribed form 10B on of before the due date of filing section 139(1) return, it had been rightly held as not eligible for section 11 exemption. 5. We find no merit in the Revenue’s instant sole substantive grievance in light of CIT vs. Xavier Kelavani Mandal (P.) Ltd., [2014] 41 taxmann.com 184 (Guj.) already settled the issue in assessee’s favour that the foregoing compliance of filing/upholding form 10B tax audit report is only directory than mandatory in ITA No.3267/Del/2024 3 | P a g e nature. We made it clear that this is not the Revenue’s case that the assessee had altogether not complied with the foregoing condition of not having filed its tax audit report. We thus see no merit in the Revenue’s instant sole substantive ground which stands rejected in very terms. 6. No other ground or argument has been pressed before us. 7. This Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 20th January, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 20th January, 2025. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi "