Section 32 Arbitration Act | Termination for Non-Payment of Fees Ends Arbitrator’s Mandate; Remedy Lies in Section 14(2): Supreme Court False Allegations of Dowry and Bigamy Amount to Mental Cruelty: Madras High Court Upholds Divorce Plaintiff Must Prove Her Own Title Before Seeking Demolition Of Defendant’s Pre-existing House: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mismatch Between Bullet and Recovered Gun Fatal to Prosecution: Calcutta High Court Acquits Man Convicted for Murder Where the Conduct of the Sole Eye-Witness Appears Unnatural and No Independent Witness Is Examined, Conviction Cannot Stand: Allahabad High Court Fraudulent Sale of Vehicle During Hire Purchase Renders Agreement Void: Gauhati High Court Upholds Decree for Refund of ₹4.90 Lakhs Unsigned Written Statement Can’t Silence a Defendant: Hyper-Technical Objections Must Yield to Substantive Justice: Delhi High Court Default Bail | No Accused, No Extension: Delhi High Court Rules Custody Extension Without Notice as Gross Illegality Under Article 21 Gratuity Can Be Withheld Post-Retirement for Proven Negligence Under Service Rules – Payment of Gratuity Act Does Not Override CDA Rules: Calcutta High Court Cognizance Is of the Offence, Not the Offender: Madras High Court Rejects Challenge to ED’s Supplementary Complaint in PMLA Case Acquittal in Rajasthan No Bar to Trial in Madhya Pradesh: MP High Court Rejects Double Jeopardy Plea in Antiquities Theft Case 20% Deposit Isn’t Automatic in Cheque Bounce Appeals: Right to Appeal Can’t Be Priced Out: Punjab & Haryana High Court Checks Mechanical Use of Section 148 NI Act A Child Is Not a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets New Benchmark in Compensation for Minors’ Deaths 90 Days Is Not Sacrosanct – Courts Can Permit Reply to Counter-Claim Even Beyond Prescribed Time in Interest of Justice: Punjab & Haryana High Court Magistrate Can Proceed Only for Offences Committed in India Until Sanction Is Obtained for Acts Outside India: Orissa High Court on International Financial Fraud Award Is Vitiated by Non-Consideration of Material Evidence: Orissa High Court Sets Aside Industrial Tribunal’s Wage Award in IMFA Case POCSO | Absence of Child's Name in Birth Certificate Not Fatal: Kerala High Court No One Has the Right to Impute Illicit Motives to Judges in the Name of Free Speech: Karnataka High Court Jails Man for Criminal Contempt DV Complaint Cannot Be Quashed at Threshold Under Article 227: Madras High Court Refuses to Interfere, Directs Accused to Seek Remedy Before Magistrate Recovery Wasn't From Accused's Exclusive Knowledge — Cylinder Already Marked in Site Plan Before Arrest: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man in Murder Case State Can’t Block SARFAESI Sale by Late Revenue Entries: Secured Creditor’s Charge Prevails Over Tax Dues: Punjab & Haryana High Court Slams Sub-Registrar’s Refusal Providing SIM Card Without Knowledge of Its Criminal Use Does Not Imply Criminal Conspiracy: P&H High Court Grants Bail in UAPA & Murder Case Importer Who Accepts Enhanced Valuation Cannot Later Contest Confiscation and Penalty for Undervaluation: Madras High Court Upholds Strict Liability under Customs Act "Allegations Are Not Proof: Madras High Court Refuses Divorce Without Substantiated Cruelty or Desertion" When FIR Is Filed After Consulting Political Leaders, the Possibility of Coloured Version Cannot Be Ruled Out: Kerala High Court Mere Allegations of Antecedents Without Conviction Can't Defeat Right to Anticipatory Bail: Kerala High Court Section 106 Of Evidence Act Cannot Be Invoked In Vacuum – Prosecution Must First Lay Foundational Facts: Karnataka High Court Acquits Wife And Co-Accused In Husband’s Murder Case Parity Cannot Be Claimed When Roles Are Different: Karnataka High Court Refuses Bail to Youth Accused of Brutal Killing Injured Wife Would Not Falsely Implicate Her Husband: Gauhati High Court Upholds Conviction in Domestic Stabbing Case Disputed Bids, Missing Evidence and No Prejudice: Delhi High Court Refuses to Intervene in Tender Challenge under Article 226 Setting Fire to House Where Only Minors Were Present is a Heinous Offence – No Quashing Merely Because Parties Settled: Calcutta High Court No Exclusive Possession Means Licence, Not Lease: Calcutta High Court Rules City Civil Court Has Jurisdiction to Evict Licensees Defendant's Own Family Attested the Sale Agreement – Yet She Called It Nominal: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Specific Performance Renewal Not Automatic, No Evidence Of Notice Or Mutual Agreement: AP High Court Dismisses Indian Oil’s Appeal Against Eviction

Late Submission of Audit Report in Form 10B Does Not Disqualify Trust from Exemption: Calcutta High Court Affirms Tribunal’s Decision

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court at Calcutta has upheld the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s (ITAT) decision that allowed Camellia Educare Trust to claim tax exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act, despite the late submission of its audit report in Form 10B. The bench, comprising Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, dismissed the Revenue’s appeal, highlighting the application of CBDT Circulars that permitted extensions for filing belated and revised returns.

Application of CBDT Circulars: The court noted that the ITAT had correctly applied CBDT Circulars F. No.173/193/2019-ITA-I dated April 23, 2019, and Circular No. 8 of 2021 dated April 30, 2021, which provided extensions for filing belated and revised returns. These circulars aimed to clarify and extend deadlines due to the practical difficulties faced by assessees.

Chief Justice Sivagnanam emphasized, “The Central Board of Direct Taxes issued Circulars allowing trusts registered under Section 12AA to file their returns within the extended timelines without losing exemption eligibility. The Tribunal’s reliance on these Circulars is justified.”

Exemption Eligibility and Compliance: The primary issue was whether the late filing of the audit report in Form 10B disqualified the trust from claiming exemptions under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act. The Revenue argued that the failure to file the report within the prescribed time under Section 139(4) should result in denial of the exemption.

However, the court held that the extensions provided by the CBDT Circulars allowed for such delays. “The learned Tribunal rightly applied the Circulars and granted relief to the assessee,” the bench remarked. This interpretation aligned with the objective of the Circulars to accommodate procedural delays and ensure that genuine charitable and religious trusts are not unduly penalized.

Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya stated, “The Tribunal’s decision to treat the return as filed within the allowed time was appropriate, considering the CBDT’s directives aimed at easing compliance burdens on assessees.”

The judgment reiterated the principle that procedural delays, especially in the context of compliance with tax regulations, should not override substantive justice. The CBDT Circulars were issued to address practical challenges and to ensure that entities eligible for exemptions are not deprived due to technical lapses.

The High Court’s dismissal of the Revenue’s appeal underscores the judiciary’s commitment to upholding the intent of tax regulations and Circulars issued by the CBDT. By affirming the ITAT’s decision, the court has reinforced the importance of flexibility in procedural compliance, ensuring that eligible trusts continue to benefit from exemptions despite minor delays in filing requirements.

Date of Decision:15th May, 2024

Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Kolkata vs. Camellia Educare Trust

Latest Legal News