Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2020 (10) TMI 625

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... oner - HELD THAT:- Mere wrong quotation of law or non-mentioning of the relevant provision of law or a typographical mistake does not disentitle a person/individual/ an institution from any relief, if otherwise he or she/individual/institution is entitled to. 2nd respondent cannot desist from exercising his power by mis-reading on the face of it without going into the merits of the application of the petitioner and the documents furnished along with it in spite of giving personal hearing opportunity for the petitioner s representative to represent his case, it is nothing but 1 Sixteenth proviso omi.by the Act No.12 of 2020, w.e.f 01.06.2020 non-application of mind and refusal to exercise his discretion, though obligated under law to pass .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... petitioner is an Educational Society running an educational college for Intermediate, Degree and Post Graduation courses for women at Rajahmandry in East Godavari District. The petitioner filed an application, dated 26.03.2019 seeking grant of exemption for the Assessment year 2019-2020, as the gross receipts of the petitioner exceeds ₹ 1 Crore in the financial year 2018-2019 under Section 10(23C) (vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. It is also the case of the petitioner that as per the provisions of Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, when the aggregate annual receipts of an Educational Society of institution exceeds ₹ 1 Crore in a financial year, then the said institution shall make an application to the prescr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... overing the financial year 2018-2019. 6. It is the further case of the petitioner that the 2nd respondent once again addressed a letter, dated 28.02.2020, directing the petitioner to appear before him on 09.03.2020 at 11.00 a.m., accordingly, the petitioner appeared before the 2nd respondent and submitted the required information. Subsequently, the 2nd respondent, vide proceedings in File No. CIT(E)/Hyd/10(23C)/46/2018-19, dated 23.03.2020, rejected the application of the petitioner for grant of exemption on the ground that the application was filed beyond the permissible time limit. 7. Sri N.Vijay, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the application filed by the petitioner is relating to the assessment year 2019-2020 on .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ught for approval under Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act,1961 for the assessment year 2018-2019 and the acknowledgement receipt for the said application was duly issued to the petitioner indicating that the application has been filed for exemption for the assessment year 2018-2019 and Form 56D specifically mentions that it was made for the assessment year 2018-2019. The petitioner also filed a letter, dated 13.02.2020, requesting the 2nd respondent to consider the application filed by him on 26.03.2019 in Form 56D for the assessment year 2019-2020 and in the absence of any specific provision under the Act, with reference to the same, the 2nd respondent has rightly rejected the request of the petitioner. She further contended that t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the 2nd respondent ought to have treated the application of the petitioner, dated 26.03.2019 for the assessment year of 2019-2020 only. 11. It is a well settled law that mere wrong quotation of law or non-mentioning of the relevant provision of law or a typographical mistake does not disentitle a person/individual/ an institution from any relief, if otherwise he or she/individual/institution is entitled to. 12. The 2nd respondent cannot desist from exercising his power by mis-reading on the face of it without going into the merits of the application of the petitioner and the documents furnished along with it in spite of giving personal hearing opportunity for the petitioner s representative to represent his case, it is nothing but 1 S .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates