CWP No.16686 of 2010 -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.16686 of 2010 Date of decision: October , 2011. Gaur Brahmin Vidya Pracharini Sabha, Rohtak ... Petitioner v. Union of India & Others ... Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SANDHAWALIA Present: Shri Pankaj Jain, Advocate, for the petitioner. Hemant Gupta , J. (Oral): Challenge in the present writ petition is to an order passed by the Commissioner of Income tax, Haryana Region, Panchkula declining the request of the petitioner for grant of exemption under Section 10(23C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Conclusions of the authority are as under:- “12. In view of the above findings, I am satisfied that firstly the application not filed within reasonable time and the delay not condoned as per reasons discussed above is not maintainable. Secondly, I am also satisfied that in the absence of any particulars detail/claim of any particular institution u/s 10 (23C)(vi) it is not possible to approve the application. Thirdly, in the absence of statutory submission of audited accounts of the institution(s) along with Balance Sheets for which the claim is sought and the fact that genuineness of the exclusive CWP No.16686 of 2010 -: 2 :- educational object of the institution(s) is not established as per enquiries conducted under 2nd proviso to 10(23C)(vi), the application of the society for exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the year 1999-2000 and onwards is hereby rejected.” The application for exemption is required to be made in the financial year immediately preceding the assessment year in question. A Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.17179 of 2008 (Young Scholars Educational Society (Regd.) v. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh and others), decided on 27.11.2008, has held that in view of the proviso to Section 10(23C) of the Act, there is no case for holding that the requirement of making application in the financial year immediately preceding the assessment year is not mandatory. It was observed:- “5. We are unable to accept this submission. In view of language of proviso of Section 10(23C) of the Act, there is no case for holding that requirements of making application in the financial year immediately preceding the assessment year in question was not mandatory”. The petitioner has not submitted the application within the prescribed period. Therefore, the request of the petitioner for grant of exemption has been rightly declined. Dismissed. [ Hemant Gupta ] Judge [ G.S. Sandhawalia ] October 20, 2011. Judge kadyan