TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (8) TMI 445
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....both dated 18.01.2025 for assessment years 2021-22 and 2022-23 respectively. Since, facts are identical and issues are common, for the sake of convenience, these appeals filed by the assessee are being heard together and disposed of by this consolidated order. 2. At the outset, we find that there is a delay of 1 day in appeals filed by the assessee. After hearing both the parties, we find that there is a reasonable cause for the assessee in not filing appeals on or before the due date prescribed under the law and thus, in the interests of justice, we condone delay in filing of appeals and admit appeals filed by the assessee for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following common grounds of appeal:- 1. For that the o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... school with a view to provide better educational facilities to the children of the employees of the Madras Port and Dock Educational Trust Higher Secondary School and to the under privileged children who are residing near the vicinity of the school. 5. The assessee filed its return of income on 15.03.2022 for the assessment year 2021-22 declaring nil income and the same was processed u/s. 143(1) on 23.08.2022 determining the total income of the assessee at Rs. 4,23,28,596/-, whereby exemption u/s. 11 was denied for the reason that audit report in Form No.10B was not filed within the due date prescribed under the Act read with rule 12A(1)(b), thereby assessing the entire gross receipts of Rs. 4,23,28,596/- at maximum marginal rate withou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me limit i.e., one month before the extended due date u/s. 139(1) for the impugned assessment year and therefore the condition for claiming exemption u/s. 11 was satisfied. 9. As regards the contention raised by the Ld.AR in respect of filing of audit report being directory and not mandatory in nature, our attention was drawn to the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT(E) v Shri Laxmanarayan Dev Shrishan Seva Khendra 2024 (10) TMI 99 wherein the Hon'ble High Court after considering the decision of the Apex Court in Wipro Limited (supra) held as follows: "5. Reliance placed by the learned Senior Standing Counsel Ms.Maithili Mehta for the assessee on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....illed and it cannot be said that though the declaration is mandatory, the filing of such declaration within the due date of filing of return under Sub-section (1) of Section 139 of the Act would be directory. 7. Reference to the aforesaid decision has no connection whatsoever remotely to the facts of the present case and therefore, in the facts of the present case, the Tribunal has rightly followed the decision of this Court in case of Sarvodaya Charitable Trust v. Income Tax Officer (Exemption) in Special Civil Application No. 6097 of 2020 decided on 09th December, 2020 as well as the decision in case of Social Security Scheme of GICEA (supra) to uphold the decision of the CIT (Appeals), wherein this Court has held that the approa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it, it would be incumbent upon the concerned authority to examine the admissibility of the benefit than to foreclose the assessee on technicalities. 11. The Ld. AR also drew our attention to the decisions of the coordinate bench of this Tribunal in the case of The Shakti Foundation v ITO in ITA No.226/Chny/2025 and Kaakkum Karangal v ITO in ITA No.1166/Chny/2024 wherein similar issues regarding delay in filing Form 10B were subject matter of consideration and the coordinate bench was of the view that the filing of Form 10B was only directory in nature and not mandatory. 12. In view of the above, the Ld.AR prayed that the assessee be granted exemption u/s. 11 since the filing of Form 10B is only directory and not mandatory in nature an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....com 184 (Guj) * M/s.Alternative India for Development v ITO in ITA No.2114 / Chny / 2024 - Chennai ITAT * Puran Chand Arora Charitable Trust v ITO [2025] 172 taxmann.com 161 (Del. Trib) 16. We also note that the Delhi Bench of the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in the case of Trilok Singh Bhandari Charitable Trust v ITO [2025] 174 taxmann.com 737 (Del. Trib) relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Chandraprabhuji Maharaj Jain (supra) held that the requirement of filing audit report in Form 10B before the due date as per Rule 12A(1)(b) is directory in nature and not mandatory. 17. We further note that the decision of the Ahmedabad Bench of the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribuna....