LIKHMARAM SIKSHAN SANSTHAN AND MALI SAMAJJ VIKAS SAMITI BALOTRA,BALOTRA vs. ITO, WARD 3(1), JODHPUR

Following are the tabulated details of the appeals and the orders appealed: ITA No. Subject matter Order particulars 480/Jodh/2024 Rejection of regular Order dated 26.02.2024, DIN registration under ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2023-24/1061506617(1) section 12AB 481/Jodh/2024 Cancellation of Provisional registration dated 17.11.2022 provisional registration cancelled through the same order dated under section 12A 26.02.2024 482/Jodh/2024 Rejection of regular Order dated 26.02.2024, DIN approval under section ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2023-24/1061507115(1) 80G(5)(iii) 483/Jodh/2024 Cancellation of Provisional approval dated 01.12.2022 provisional approval cancelled through the same order dated under section 80G 26.02.2024

In the condonation petition, the assessee has stated that the impugned orders were passed ex parte by the learned CIT(E), Jaipur, rejecting the applications for registration under section 12AB and

It has been explained that, owing to several recent changes in the statutory provisions governing charitable trusts, the assessee was uncertain as to the appropriate legal remedy, namely, whether it should submit fresh applications or challenge the impugned orders before the Tribunal. The assessee is situated at Balotra, which is stated to be a remote area of Rajasthan, and had to travel to Jodhpur or Jaipur for obtaining appropriate legal advice. Time was accordingly consumed in obtaining professional advice regarding the proper remedy available against the impugned orders. The assessee has further explained that, upon being advised that the appropriate remedy was to prefer appeals before the Tribunal, it engaged counsel, prepared the necessary appeal papers and filed all four appeals before the Tribunal on 31.05.2024. It was, therefore, submitted that the delay was occasioned by a bona fide uncertainty regarding the appropriate legal remedy and was neither deliberate nor attributable to any want of diligence.

We have considered the reasons stated in the condonation petition and the material placed before us. The delay is of 34 days. The assessee has satisfactorily explained that the delay occurred while obtaining appropriate legal advice as to whether it should submit fresh applications or prefer appeals against the impugned orders. Considering the explanation furnished, the location of the assessee at Balotra, the time consumed in obtaining legal advice and the absence of any objection from the Revenue, we are satisfied that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeals within the prescribed period. Accordingly, the delay of 34 days in filing each of the four appeals is condoned and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits.

The grounds raised by the assessee read as under: Grounds in ITA No. 480/Jodh/2024 1. That the order passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption, Jaipur by rejecting application u/s. 12AB (1)(b) of the I.T. Act, 1961 is wrong, unwarranted and bad in law. Kindly direct to register the same. 2. That the appellant craves permission to add to or amend to any of the above grounds of appeal or to withdraw any of them.

The assessee is a charitable institution which was granted provisional registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) on 17.11.2022 and provisional approval under section 80G on 01.12.2022. On 30.09.2023, the assessee filed applications in Form No. 10AB seeking regular registration under section 12AB and regular approval under section 80G(5)(iii).

The learned CIT(E), Jaipur, issued notices calling upon the assessee to furnish the prescribed documents and information relating to its

By order dated 26.02.2024, the learned CIT(E) rejected the application for regular registration under section 12AB on the grounds that Form No. 10AB was incomplete, the assessee had not established its registration under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959, and the genuineness of its activities could not be verified. By the same order, the provisional registration granted on 17.11.2022 was also cancelled.

By a separate order of the same date, the application for regular approval under section 80G was rejected principally on the grounds that the assessee did not possess a valid registration under section 12A or section 12AB and that the application had not been filed within the prescribed period reckoned from the commencement of its activities. The provisional approval granted on 01.12.2022 was also cancelled. Aggrieved by these actions, the assessee has preferred the present four appeals.

The learned DR submitted that the registration now produced by the assessee requires verification by the learned CIT(E). He submitted that the eligibility of the assessee for registration under section 12AB and approval under section 80G should be examined and decided by the learned CIT(E) afresh on merits and in accordance with law.

We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material placed on record. The regular registration under section 12AB was, inter alia, declined on the ground that the assessee had failed to establish its registration under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959. The

The learned AR has now produced the registration under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 and has submitted that the same was not available before the learned CIT(E). The said registration has a direct bearing upon one of the principal reasons recorded in the impugned orders. Its authenticity, effective date, validity and applicability to the assessee have not been examined by the learned CIT(E). The consequences flowing from such registration also require examination by the competent authority.

In these circumstances, and having regard to the concurrence of both sides that the matter requires examination by the learned CIT(E), we consider it just and proper to set aside the impugned orders to the extent they reject the applications for regular registration under section 12AB and regular approval under section 80G. The applications are restored to the file of the learned CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.

The learned CIT(E) shall verify the registration produced by the assessee under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959. The learned CIT(E)

It is clarified that the remand is not confined merely to the verification of the registration under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959. The learned CIT(E) shall be at liberty to examine all other statutory requirements arising from the applications, including the completeness of Form No. 10AB, genuineness of the activities, supporting accounts and documents, compliance with the prescribed time limit, commencement of activities and, in the proceedings under section 80G, the existence of a valid registration under section 12A or section 12AB. All such issues shall be decided independently in accordance with law.

The assessee shall furnish the registration certificate and all other documents and explanations required for adjudication and shall extend full cooperation in the proceedings. The learned CIT(E) shall afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and thereafter pass speaking orders in accordance with law. We have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the applications.

Since the matters relating to regular registration and approval have been restored, the consequential issues concerning cancellation of the provisional registration under section 12A and provisional approval under section 80G also require reconsideration. We, therefore, direct the learned CIT(E) to consider and decide the cancellation issues together with the respective applications for regular registration and approval, after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. In view of these directions, no separate adjudication survives in ITA Nos. 481 and 483/Jodh/2024 and, accordingly, these appeals are disposed of as infructuous.

In the result: - ITA No. 480/Jodh/2024 is allowed for statistical purposes; - ITA No. 481/Jodh/2024 is dismissed as infructuous; - ITA No. 482/Jodh/2024 is allowed for statistical purposes; and