2026 (2) TMI 1195

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....5 passed by Respondent No. 1, Commissioner of Income - tax (Exemptions), Mumbai, under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ["the Act"], rejecting the application for condonation of delay in filing Form No. 10 for Assessment Year 2015-16. The Petitioner has also challenged the Intimation dated 22.10.2016 issued under Section 143(1) of the Act denying exemption under Section 11(2) of the Act to the extent of Rs. 47,00,000/-; and the consequential failure to grant exemption u/s. 11(2) of the Act. 3. The Petitioner is a public charitable trust registered under Section 12A / 12AB of the Act since 1980. The Petitioner has been regularly complying with various obligations for seeking exemption under Section 11 of the Act for more than....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to understand later on that the same was because Form No. 10 was not filed within the prescribed time (i.e. 31.10.2015). The Petitioner subsequently filed Form No. 10 electronically on 21.11.2016. 7. The Petitioner, thereafter, moved a rectification application before Respondent No.3 on 20.12.2016. However, the same did not result in grant of relief. Under the aforesaid circumstances, the Petitioner filed an application before Respondent No. 1 on 07.10.2020 for seeking condonation of the delay in filing Form No. 10, under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act. This application was rejected by Respondent No. 1 vide his impugned order dated 24.02.2025 on the ground of absence of reasonable cause for the delay in filing Form No. 10. Respondent No. 1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... due to unavoidable circumstances, in the Covid - 19 pandemic, the Petitioner could utilize only Rs. 2,28,467/- in A.Y. 2020 - 2021 out of the total accumulation of Rs. 47,00,000/- in A.Y. 2015-16. The balance unutilized amount of Rs. 44,17,533/- was offered to tax in the sixth year of accumulation under Section 11(3) of the Act. Thus, the disallowance of exemption in A.Y. 2015-16 would lead to double taxation. 11. We derive support from the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Nagpur Hotel Owners' Association, (2001) 247 ITR 201 (SC), wherein it was held that furnishing of Form No. 10 before completion of assessment constitutes sufficient compliance. 12. In any case, this Court, in several of its orders involving a similar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....claiming exemption under Section 11 of the Act. Therein, reliance was also placed on a judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Sarvodaya Charitable Trust v. ITO (E) (2021) 125 taxmann.com 75 laying down the principle that in cases like the present one, the approach of the authority ought to be equitious, balancing and judicious and availing of exemption should not be denied merely on the bar of limitation. This is more so when the Legislature has, under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act, conferred discretionary powers to condone the delay on the authorities concerned with a view to avoid genuine hardship." 14. Moreover, not condoning such delay would cause genuine hardship to the Petitioner in as much as the Petitioner has been deni....