<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (7) TMI 514 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774446</link>
    <description>Belated filing of Form 10B does not by itself defeat a charitable trust&#039;s Section 11 exemption where the audit report is available to the Assessing Officer before processing under Section 143(1). The filing requirement is treated as procedural and directory, with substantial compliance satisfying the exemption condition. Exemption was therefore allowed despite the report not being filed with the return. Although the first appellate authority&#039;s ex-parte dismissal for non-prosecution was procedurally sustained, the exemption claim succeeded on merits because the audit report had been filed before assessment and delay caused by a consultant&#039;s mistake was not a substantive bar.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Mar 2026 15:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=834634" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (7) TMI 514 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774446</link>
      <description>Belated filing of Form 10B does not by itself defeat a charitable trust&#039;s Section 11 exemption where the audit report is available to the Assessing Officer before processing under Section 143(1). The filing requirement is treated as procedural and directory, with substantial compliance satisfying the exemption condition. Exemption was therefore allowed despite the report not being filed with the return. Although the first appellate authority&#039;s ex-parte dismissal for non-prosecution was procedurally sustained, the exemption claim succeeded on merits because the audit report had been filed before assessment and delay caused by a consultant&#039;s mistake was not a substantive bar.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774446</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>