The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Kolkata bench has held that the adjudicating authorities under the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot grant approval under section 10(23C) with retrospective effect in the absence of any such provision in the law.
The assessee, Bishnupur Public Education Institute, has filed applications on 11.02.2019 under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act for grant of approval as an Educational Institution in A.Ys. 2016- 17, 2017-18 and 2018-19 respectively, though the assessee has been enjoying registration under section 12A but it filed applications for grant of approval under section 10(23C)(vi). The CIT(Exemption) rejected these applications as the same were time-barred. The order was challenged by the assessee before the Tribunal.
The Tribunal bench comprising Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ) & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member has observed that the Madras High Court in the case of All Angels Educational Society while considering the issue whether the ld. CIT(Exemption) has power to condone the delay in filing application for grant of approval under section 10(23C) or not, has considered the judgments of the Supreme Court in the case of State of U.P. –vs.- Harish Chandra as well as Union of India –vs.- Kirloskar Pneumatic Co. Limited and held that where there is no provision to empower the statutory authority to condone the delay, than the authority cannot condoned.
“The adjudicating authorities under the Income Tax Act are quasi-judicial authorities. They can grant approval with retrospective effect if such mechanism is provided in the Act. There is no such provision nor there is any power to condone the delay after considering the reasonable reasons. A reasonable cause can be taken into cognizance for condoning the delay, if such provision is provided in the Act while considering any issue for adjudication. Therefore, considering the above proposition, we are of the view that ld. CIT(Exemption) has rightly rejected the application of the assessee for grant of approval under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act. All these three appeals are rejected,” the Tribunal said.
Sri S.M. Surana, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
