GAUTAM BUDHA SOCIETY FOR SOCIAL WELFARE,NOIDA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3681/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 August 2021AY 2017-184 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the order granting registration was justification to give effect to it from the originally sought date. Therefore, the CIT(E) was directed to grant registration from the assessment year 2017-18.

What were the facts?

The assessee society applied for registration u/s 12AA, which was initially rejected. Subsequently, a fresh application led to registration being granted, but the effective date was later modified. The assessee appealed the initial rejection with a significant delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the effective date of registration granted under Section 12AA can be modified, and if the delay in filing an appeal against the initial rejection should be condoned.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘C’ NEW DLEHI

Before: SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA & SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY

For Appellant: Ms. Aditi Gupta, CA
For Respondent: Ms. Anima, Sr. DR
Hearing: 28/07/2021

PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M. Aggrieved by the order dated 17/05/2017 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)- Lucknow ("Ld. CIT(E)") for the assessment year 2017-18, Gautam Budha Society for Social Welfare (“the assessee”) preferred this appeal. 2. Brief facts of the case, relevant for disposal of this appeal, are that the assessee is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act on 30.04.2016 with the main objectives of relief to poor and medical relief etc. They have filed an application for registration u/s. 12AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) on 09.11.2016, but the information sought by the ld. CIT(E) vide notice dated 22.04.2017 could be complied with by the assessee due to the reason beyond their control. Assessee further submits that subsequently they came to know that the said application was rejected because of non-furnishing of the material like books, bank accounts etc.

3.

Subsequently, assessee filed another application on 23/06/2017 seeking exemption and after due verification of the material and facts placed before the learned CIT(E), vide order dated 22.12.2017, learned CIT(E) granted registration w.e.f. 2017-18. However, by order dated 07.02.2018, learned CIT(E) rectified the earlier order modifying the effect of registration from 2018-19 instead of 2017-18, as stated in the order dated 22.12.2017. Then having realised the necessity of filing of an appeal against the order dated 17.05.2017, by way of which, learned CIT(E) declined to grant registration, the assessee preferred this appeal with a delay of 291 days.

4.

It is submitted on behalf of the assessee that the assessee was happy with the order dated 22.12.2017 because the registration was granted w.e.f. 2017-18, but it is only subsequently due to the order dated 07.02.2018, the assessee realised the necessity of preferring the appeal against the order dated 17.05.2017. It is further submitted that it is only due to the bona fide and mistaken impression of the assessee, the delay occurred and therefore, the delay may be condoned. The assessee places reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s. United Christmas Celebration Committee Charitable Trust v. ITO (2017)

1.

249 Taxman 372 and another decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Bharat Auto Center v. CIT, 282 ITR 366 (Alld.).

5.

Learned DR fairly conceded to allow the condonation of delay in view of the facts pleaded by the assessee. While recording the same and also in view of the fact that there is a reasonable belief in the mind of the assessee due to the order dated 22.12.2017 and also that the assessee does not stand to gain by challenging the order dated 17.05.2017 with delay, we are inclined to condone the delay and proceed to hear the appeal on merits.

More judgments on Section 12AA

All 4,243 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →