MATHIKUMAR EDUCATIONAL TRUST,SIVAGANGAI V. CIT, EXEMPTIONS, CHENNAI

ITA 2000/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Mathikumar Educational Trust, which appealed against the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chennai, rejecting their application for registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary reasons for rejection were the belated filing of the application and the failure to provide requisite details as called for in a show-cause notice. The Tribunal heard arguments from both sides and decided to restore the matter to the CIT(E) for a fresh evaluation, considering the assessee's pending application for condonation of delay.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 773544 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 17-07-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHIVA SRINIVAS
• Assessee Lawyers: R.VISWANATHAN; F.C.A
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Competent authority

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, ‘बी’ Ûयायपीठ, चेÛनई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI Įी जॉज[ जॉज[ क े, उपाÚय¢ एवं Įी एस.आर.रघुनाथा, लेखा सदèय क े सम¢ BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 2000/CHNY/2025 M/s. Mathikumar Educational Trust, 11-2-37A Madurai Main Road, Velu Servai Building, Thiruppathur, Thiruppathur Taluk, Sivagangai District – 630 211. PAN: AAFTM 0988A Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chennai. (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri R. Viswanathan, F.C.A ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Shiva Srinivas, CIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 23.09.2025 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 23.09.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal filed by the assessee trust is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai dated 21.06.2025, rejecting Form No.10AB filed for seeking registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’). Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2000/Chny/2025 :- 2 -: 2. The solitary issue that is raised is whether the CIT(E) is justified in rejecting application of the assessee trust, seeking registration u/s.12AB of the Act. 3. Brief facts of the case are as follows: The assessee trust had filed application in Form 10AB on 11.11.2024 seeking registration u/s.12AB of the Act. The CIT(E) rejected the application of the assessee seeking registration u/s.12AB of the Act primarily for the reason that the said application was filed belatedly and also for the reason that assessee had not provided requisite details called for in the show-cause notice’s issued. 4. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(E), the assessee trust has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. The grounds raised read as follows:- 1. The order dated 21.06.2025 of the Learned CIT Exemptions, Chennai, in ITBA/EXMIF/EXM45/2025-26/1077314829(1) is contrary to facts, opposed to law and untenable. 2. The Learned CIT Exemptions erred in Rejecting the registration of the Trust, without giving any specific finding for the rejection of Appellant trust on the issue of genuineness of the activities of the Appellant trust and Compliance with the other laws for achieving the objects of the trust. 3. The Ld CIT Exemptions chennai should have consider the document submitted before him and should have accepted the claim of the assessee of granting registration for 12AB of Income Tax Act. 4. The Ld CIT Exemptions should have afforded one more opportunity and rejected the registration on the issue related to scrutiny proceedings 5. The LD CIT Exemptions filled all the requirement/condition of the law as provided regarding obtaining registration under section l2AB of the IT Act Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2000/Chny/2025 :- 3 -: therefore the order of the CIT(E) is liable for quash or a further opportunity be afforded to the Appellant. 6. That the CIT (E) should have appreciated the submission submitted before CIT (E) regarding the aims object of the trust and looking to the totality of circumstances following the judgment of the Supreme Court in which the Hon'ble Court held that (When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred for the other side cannot claim to have vested right in injustice being done because of a nondeliberate delay. 5. The Ld.AR has placed on record, a copy of application filed before the Competent Authority u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act seeking condonation of delay in filing Form No.10AB. The Ld.AR submitted that assessee had provided the requisite details pursuant to the notice issued from the office of the CIT(E) on 12.02.2025 and 14.03.2025. However, it was candidly admitted by the Ld.AR that assessee had not furnished the comparison between the fees collected and the fees prescribed by the Government. The Ld.AR submitted as a last opportunity, the assessee’s application in Form 10AB may be restored to the files of the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication of the matter, since assessee’s application for condonation of delay u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act is also pending consideration. 6. The Ld.DR supported the order of the CIT(E). 7. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The assessee’s application seeking registration u/s.12AB of Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2000/Chny/2025 :- 4 -: the Act was rejected primarily for the reason that the same was filed belated. The assessee ought to have filed Form 10AB on or before 30.09.2024. However, the said application was filed by the assessee only on 11.11.2024. The assessee has now produced copy of condonation application filed before the competent authority u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act for condoning the delay in filing Form 10AB. In light of the above condonation application, which is pending consideration before the competent authority, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter to the files of the CIT(E) for fresh consideration of the matter. The assessee is alsodirected to provide all the requisite details called for by the CIT(E) during the course of proceedings seeking registration u/s.12AB of the Act. It is ordered accordingly. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 23rd September, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (एस.आर. रघुनाथा) (S.R. RAGHUNATHA) लेखा सदèय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (जॉज[ जॉज[ क े) (GEORGE GEORGE K) उपाÚय¢ /VICE PRESIDENT चे᳖ई/Chennai, ᳰदनांक/Dated, the 23rd September, 2025 RSR Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2000/Chny/2025 :- 5 -: आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथȸ/Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत /CIT, Chennai 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध/DR 5. गाड[ फाईल/GF. Printed from counselvise.com "