TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (5) TMI 960
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2 for the assessment year 2016-17, wherein the impugned order has been assailed on the following grounds of appeal: "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in denying the exemption u/s.11 at Rs.24,83,562/- by stating that audit report in Form No.10B has not been filed before the due date of filing return of income u/s.139. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in denying the exemption u/s.11 at Rs.24,83,562/-, while, there is no change in the objects and activities of the earlier and subsequent A.Ys and further, there is no finding that the assessee had carried on any activity not in accordance with its objectives and therefore, in the absence of any finding of facts, the exemption u/s.11 cannot be denied, thus, addition is liable to be deleted. 3. The appellant craves leave, to add, urge, alter, modify or withdraw any ground/s before or at the time of hearing." 3. As is discernible from the record the present appeals as pointed out by the registry involve a delay of 1 day. As the period of impugned delay therein involved is covered by the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of CBDT Circular No.28/2019 [F.No.197/55/2018-ITA-1], dated 27.09.2019 read a/w. Circular No.7/2021 [F.NO.197/49/2021-ITA-1] dated 26.03.2021. It was, inter alia, provided in CBDT Circular NO. 10 [F.No.197/55/2018-ITA-1], dated 22.05.2019 Para 4(i) that the delay in filing of Form 10B for A.Y.2016-17 and A.Y 2017-18, in all such cases where audit report for the previous year had been obtained before filing of return of income and was furnished subsequent to the filing of return of income but before the date prescribed u/s.139 of the Act, were to be condoned. Accordingly, the CIT(Appeals) referring to the CBDT Circular No.28/2019 dated 26.03.2021, observed that the delay in filing Form 10B for A.Y.2016-17 and A.Y.2017-18 could only be condoned in those cases where Form 10B was filed before the "due date" of filing of return of income u/s.139 of the Act. The CIT(Appeals) observed that as stated by the A.O, as the assessee had e-filed the Form 10B on 21.06.2019, i.e. beyond the "due date" for filing of its return of income u/s.139 of the Act, therefore, its case did not fall within the scope and gamut of Para 4(i) of the aforesaid Circular No.28/2019 dated 27.09.2019. Accordingly, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... produced the same in the course of proceedings before the CIT(Appeals) which had culminated vide the latter's order 29.11.2021, there was no justification for him to decline the assessee's claim for exemption u/s.11 of the Act. In order to support his aforesaid contention the Ld. AR had relied upon a host of judicial pronouncements. 11. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative (for short 'DR') relied on the orders of the lower authorities. It was submitted by the Ld. DR that as the assessee-trust was obligated to e-file/upload its "audit report" u/s.12A(b) of the Act in Form 10B a/w. its return of income for the year under consideration, which it had failed to do, therefore, its entitlement for exemption u/s.11 of the Act was rightly declined by the DCIT, CPC vide intimation u/s.143(1)(a) of the Act, which order was thereafter was sustained by the CIT(Appeals). 12. Controversy involved in the present appeal lies in a narrow compass, i.e. as to whether or not the case of the assessee falls within the realm of Para 4(i) of the CBDT Circular No.10 [F.No.197/55/2018-ITA-I], dated 22.05.2019. Before proceeding any further, it would be relevant to cull out the aforesaid circula....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... such trusts or institutions for condoning the delay in filing Form No. 10B and in exercise of the powers conferred under section 119(2) of the Act, the Central Board of Direct Taxes hereby directs that: (i) The delay in filing of Form No. 10B for AY 2016-17 and AY 2017- 18, in all such cases where the Audit Report for the previous year has been obtained before the filing of return of income and has been furnished subsequent to the filing of the return of income but before the date specified under section 139 of the Act is condoned. (ii) In all other cases of belated applications in filing Form No.10B for years prior to AY 2018-19, the Commissioners of Income-tax are authorized to admit such applications for condonation of delay u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act. The Commissioners will while entertaining such belated applications in filing Form No.10B shall satisfy themselves that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause from filing such application within the stipulated time. [Further, all such pending applications as well as applications received henceforth shall be disposed off preferably within three months from end of the month in which the application is received.]" On a ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of Form 10B would not be covered by Para 4(i) (supra), therefore, the same would fall within the sweep of Para 4(ii) of the CBDT Circular No.10 (supra), which, as observed by me hereinabove, would be applicable to all other cases prior to A.Y.2018-19 where Form 10B is belatedly filed. Accordingly, I am of the considered view that the case of the assessee due to non-satisfaction of the conditions contemplated in Para 4(i) of CBDT Circular No. 10(supra), would thus fall within the sweep of Para 4(ii) of the said circular (supra.). 15. Be that as it may, as the assessee-trust does not cumulatively satisfy the set of conditions specified in Para 4(i) of the CBDT Circular No.10 (supra), and also had not filed any application for condonation of delay u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act as provided in Para 4(ii) of the said circular, therefore, there remains no occasion for condoning the delay involved in filing of Form 10B by the assessee beyond the stipulated time period. I, thus, on the basis of my aforesaid observations, find no infirmity in the view taken by the lower authorities who had rightly declined the assessee's claim for exemption u/s.11 of the Act. However, I may herein observe that t....