Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI OCR

Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2025 (5) TMI 390

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....has erred in rejecting the application for granting approval u/s 10(23C)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. 2. That the rejection of application u/s 10(23C)(iii) is against the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. That the replies as filed during the course of proceedings before the CIT(Exemptions) have not been considered properly. 4. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend the grounds of appeal before the appeal is finally heard or deposed off." 3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the Indian Institute of Management Sirmaur is a Centrally Funded Institution of National Importance set up by the Government of India in 2015. IIM Sirmaur is one of the newer institutions of the IIM family in the country.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sessee. 7. Thereafter, the appellant applied to Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh for final registration under clause (iii) of first proviso to clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act in Form 10AB dated 17.04.2024. 8. The CIT (Exemptions) called for detailed information, which was complied and no objection was raised to the activities carried out by the Trust. The CIT (Exemptions) refused to grant the registration, since it was noticed that the provisional approval could not have been granted to the assessee as the appellant has already commenced its activities in 2015 and, thus, it was stated by the CIT (Exemptions) that provisional approval being bad in law and, thus, rejected the application of the assessee. 9. I....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Counsel also relied upon the judgment of Chandigarh Bench of the ITAT that even if there is mistake by the assessee for claiming the legitimate exemption/deduction, the Income Tax Authority is duty bound to consider such legitimate claim and give it under the proper and legitimate section to the assessee, even if it is claimed under wrong section. The Counsel also relied upon the following judgments: - a. The Habrol Cooperative Agricultural Service Society Limited vs. The ITO in ITA No. 158/Chd/2024 dated 26.09.2024 ITAT Chd. b. Punjab Agriculture University vs. The DCIT(Exemption), Chandigarh in ITA No. 661/Chd/2024 and 492/Chd/2024 dated 18.12.2024 ITAT Chd c. CIT vs Heidrick and Struggles Inc. reported in 461 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the application as filed by the assessee for grant of approval under clause (iii) of first proviso to clause (23C) of section 10 is rejected. The appellant Institute is existing since 2015 and, as such, the approval was refused only on account of technical mistake on the part of the counsel of the assessee, who inadvertently had choosen wrong subsection while moving the application for approval under clause (iii) of first proviso to clause (23C) of section 10. 15. The Chandigarh Bench of the ITAT in similar facts and circumstances, in the case of The Harbrol Cooperative Agricultural Service Society Ltd. in ITA No. 158/Chd/2024, where a similar issue was there has taken a view that if there is mistake by the assessee for claiming legitim....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssee who claimed deduction by putting wrong section in the return of income should not be considered the culpability of the Assessee. Accordingly, we are of the considered opinion that Assessee's appeal on grounds in both the assessment years i.e., 2018-19 and 2019-20 should be allowed. 24. In the result, Assessee's appeal for A.Y. 2018-19 and 2019-20 are allowed." 17. We have also gone through the judgment of Delhi High Court in the case of Heidrick and Struggles Inc., reported in 461 ITR 33 and, wherein, the following finding has been given:- "15. Having regard to the aforesaid, we are of the view that the Tribunal has taken a just view in consonance with the provisions of the Act and the aforementioned circul....