JTL EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) CHANDIGARH

CWP/7180/2024

AI Insights

The case involves JTL Educational Foundation as the petitioner and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) as the respondent. The core issue was the belated submission of an audit report in Form 10B, which was filed 30 days after the prescribed deadline. The respondent contested the delay, arguing that timely filing is a basic eligibility condition for seeking exemption. However, the court found that the delay was minor and could be condoned, emphasizing that the audit report should be considered once filed, regardless of the delay.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 674650 (HC-MISC)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 11-11-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: VARUN ISSAR
• Assessee Lawyers: SIDHI BANSAL; RIDHI BANSAL
• Keywords: Audit report; Delay condonation; Form 10B; Income tax exemption
• Section: 10B

Judgement Text

"CWP-7180-2024 108+268 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT JTL EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Ms. Sidhi Bansal, Advocate and Ms. Ridhi Bansal, for the petitioner. Mr. Varun Issar, for the SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) CM-16901-CWP Application for placing on record reply on behalf of respondent is allowed, subject to all just Registry to place the same at appropriate place. Main case 1. Admittedly, the audit report submitted by the petitioner prescribed date of filing of audit report. 2. The delay of 30 days cannot be said to be such which cannot be condoned. The respondents have filed their reply which is taken on record. However, from the contents of the reply, the only contention 2024 (O&M) Page 1 of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH JTL EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) **** HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH **** Ms. Sidhi Bansal, Advocate and Ms. Ridhi Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Varun Issar, Sr. Standing Counsel for the respondents/Revenue. **** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) CWP-2024 Application for placing on record reply on behalf of respondent is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Registry to place the same at appropriate place. Admittedly, the audit report was prepared in Form 10B and was submitted by the petitioner albeit after a period of 30 days of the prescribed date of filing of audit report. The delay of 30 days cannot be said to be such which cannot be condoned. The respondents have filed their reply which is taken on record. However, from the contents of the reply, the only contention IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CM-16901-CWP-2024 in/and CWP-7180-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 11.11.2024 . . . . Petitioner COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH . . . . Respondent HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA SANJAY VASHISTH Sr. Standing Counsel Application for placing on record reply on behalf of respondent Registry to place the same at appropriate place. was prepared in Form 10B and was after a period of 30 days of the prescribed date of filing of audit report. The delay of 30 days cannot be said to be such which cannot be condoned. The respondents have filed their reply which is taken on record. However, from the contents of the reply, the only contention in/and (O&M) .2024 Petitioner . . . . Respondent was prepared in Form 10B and was after a period of 30 days of the The delay of 30 days cannot be said to be such which cannot be condoned. The respondents have filed their reply which is taken on record. However, from the contents of the reply, the only contention MOHIT GOYAL 2024.11.12 12:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-7180-2024 raised by the respondent is that the audit report was bel on 15.03.2022 while the same was prepared on 14.01.2022, and it ought to have 3. Counsel for the Revenue submits that the filing of Form 10B within the prescribed exemption timely and 2021 delay. 4. We find that the power to condone th department. The audit report, once it is on record, ought to be considered and the same ought not be ignored. In view thereto, we condone the delay and direct that the audit report The order dated 07.03. fresh order on merits. 5. Writ Petition is accordingly allowed. 6. All pending applications also stand disposed of. November 11, 2024 Mohit goyal 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? 2. Whether reportable? 2024 (O&M) Page 2 of 2 raised by the respondent is that the audit report was bel on 15.03.2022 while the same was prepared on 14.01.2022, and it ought to have been uploaded by 15.02.2022. Counsel for the Revenue submits that the filing of Form 10B within the prescribed timeline is a basic eligibility exemption. It is also submitted that the petitioner timely filing audit reports for assessment years 2019 and 2021-22, and therefore there should not be any condonation of We find that the power to condone th department. The audit report, once it is on record, ought to be considered and the same ought not be ignored. In view thereto, we condone the delay and direct that the audit report The order dated 07.03.2024 is set aside. fresh order on merits. Writ Petition is accordingly allowed. All pending applications also stand disposed of. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA , 2024 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No 2. Whether reportable? Yes/No raised by the respondent is that the audit report was belatedly uploaded on 15.03.2022 while the same was prepared on 14.01.2022, and it uploaded by 15.02.2022. Counsel for the Revenue submits that the filing of Form 10B within eligibility condition for seeking It is also submitted that the petitioner had been negligent in filing audit reports for assessment years 2019-2020, 2020-21, 22, and therefore there should not be any condonation of We find that the power to condone the delay is available with the department. The audit report, once it is on record, ought to be considered and the same ought not be ignored. In view thereto, we condone the delay and direct that the audit report to be taken on record. 2024 is set aside. The respondent shall pass a All pending applications also stand disposed of. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No atedly uploaded on 15.03.2022 while the same was prepared on 14.01.2022, and it Counsel for the Revenue submits that the filing of Form 10B within ing had been negligent in 21, 22, and therefore there should not be any condonation of e delay is available with the department. The audit report, once it is on record, ought to be considered and the same ought not be ignored. In view thereto, we be taken on record. espondent shall pass a MOHIT GOYAL 2024.11.12 12:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document "