9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 863X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unwarranted, unsustainable, not proper on the facts of the case and not in accordance with the provisions of law in this regard. That the Ld. CIT by issuing the detailed questionnaire so as to examine the merits of the case must be deemed to have condoned the delay in filing the application for approval under the provisions of section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act hence, the Ld. CIT has grossly erred in rejecting the application merely on account of delay in filing of the application. Without prejudice to the above, the Order denying approval u/s.10(23C)(vi) of the Act was passed by the Ld. CIT on 30th September, 2020 i.e. much beyond the time limit contemplated for filing application seeking approval in respect of the Assessment Year 2019-20 hence, though the application was valid in all respects, the Ld. CIT ought to have granted the approval from the Assessment Year 2019-20 onwards. Hence, it is prayed that the Order passed by the Ld. CIT under the provisions of section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act denying approval to the appellant society may please be annulled and set aside and it is earnestly requested that the approval under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act may please be granted. G ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the genuineness of the objects and activities of the society, a detailed questionnaire calling forth details and necessary documents was issued vide this office notice dated 09.09.2019 fixing the case for compliance on 20.09.2019. 3. In response to the above notice, part submission was received online on 15.09.2019 whereby the applicant has not submitted the complete details in accordance with the questionnaire and provisions of section 10(23C). On perusal of the documents, it is seen that the society has applied for exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) on 24.04.2019 for A.Yr.2018-19 and subsequent assessment years. As per sixteenth proviso to Section 10(23C), the application in Form No. 56D is required to be submitted on or before 30th September of the relevant Assessment Year i.e. by 30.09.2018, whereas the assessee has applied for A.Y. 2018-19 after 30th September 2018 hence the said application is belated. In View of the above discussion, it is obvious that the application for approval u/s 10(23C) is belated and, therefore, the applicant is not eligible for approval u/s 10(23C)(vi). Therefore, the application in Form No.56D dated 25.04.2019 seeking approval under U/s. 10(23C)(vi) is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ution referred to in sub-clause (iv) or sub-clause (v) or sub-clause (vi) or sub-clause (via) shall make an application in the prescribed form and manner to the prescribed authority for the purpose of grant of the exemption, or continuance thereof, under sub-clause (iv) or sub-clause (v) or sub-clause (vi) or sub-clause (via); Provided further that the prescribed authority, before approving any fund or trust or institution or any university or other educational institution or any hospital or other medical institution, under sub-clause (iv) or sub-clause (v) or sub-clause (vi) or sub-clause (via), may call for such documents (including audited annual accounts) or information from the fund or trust or institution or any university or other educational institution or any hospital or other medical institution, as the case may be, as it thinks necessary in order to satisfy itself about the genuineness of the activities of such fund or trust or institution or any university or other educational institution or any hospital or other medical institution, as the case may be, and the compliance of such requirements under any other law for the time being in force by such fund or trust or ins ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... delay in filing an application under Section 10(23C) of the Act, this Court is not inclined to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction to condone the delay. However, this Court is inclined to give appropriate direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's application as an application for the subsequent assessment year, namely, 2013-2014 in accordance with law. Such direction is issued considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and that the petitioner could not have made an application for the subsequent assessment year 2013-2014, since their application for assessment year 2012-2013 was still pending consideration and the impugned order came to be passed only on 13.11.2013. The respondent is at liberty to consider the amended objectives of the petitioner Trust. 16. Accordingly, the writ petition is partly allowed and the finding rendered by the respondent that the petitioner's application cannot be considered as the same is time barred is affirmed and the finding with regard to objectives of the Society by respondent holding that the Society cannot be said to be solely for education purpose is set aside. Consequently, the matter is remanded ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... All Angels Educational Society (supra), the High Court had though rejected the assessee's request for condonation of delay involved in filing of its application for approval under Sec. 10(23C)(vi) for A.Y. 2012-13, but accepting its alternative contention that as its application for the said year i.e. A.Y. 2012-13 was pending consideration and the impugned order came to passed only on 13.11.2013, therefore, it could not have filed an application for the subsequent assessment year i.e. A.Y. 2013-14, had remanded the matter to the file of the CIT, Exemption with a direction to consider the same as the assessee's application for the succeeding year i.e. A.Y. 2013-14. Also, a similar view had been taken by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Sanjay Ghodawat University Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) and others (2021) 431 ITR 559 (Bom.). It was observed by the Hon'ble High Court that though the CIT(Exemption) was correct in rejecting the application filed by the assessee u/s.10(23C)(vi) for the A.Y. 2019-20 as being time barred, but he certainly fell in error in not considering the said application for subsequent assessment year, i.e., for the A.Y.2020-21 and onw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
