R. C. BOTHRA FOUNDATION,KOLKATA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), , KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 836/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 June 20255 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals, finding the reasons provided in the assessee's affidavit to be genuine and bonafide, and noting the revenue's lack of objection. Regarding the rejection of the application for registration under Section 12A(i)(ac)(iii), the Tribunal observed that the CIT(E) had rejected it in limine due to the assessee's failure to produce relevant papers. However, the assessee had filed Form 10AC for provisional approval and undertook to provide all necessary documents. Therefore, the Tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity to present its case and documents. Similarly, for the rejection of the application for approval under Section 80G(5)(iii), the Tribunal noted the assessee's failure to submit documents, but also acknowledged that the assessee was a Section 8 company with provisional registration under both Section 12A and 80G. The Tribunal restored this appeal to the CIT(E) for a fresh order after giving the assessee an opportunity to submit all necessary documents. The ratio is that technicalities should not prevent a decision on merits, and genuine reasons for non-compliance, coupled with a willingness to rectify, warrant an opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee, R.C. Bothra Foundation, filed appeals against orders dated 23.11.2023 and 31.10.2023 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Kolkata (CIT(E)). The appeals were filed with a significant delay of 450 and 473 days, respectively. The assessee attributed the delay to a defunct email address, a change in registered office, the departure of a key staff member, and a lack of experience and knowledge in compliance procedures. The revenue did not object to the condonation of delay. The CIT(E) had rejected the assessee's applications for registration under Section 12A(i)(ac)(iii) and approval under Section 80G(5)(iii) in limine due to non-compliance with notices and failure to furnish required documents.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the delay in filing the appeals by the assessee is liable to be condoned, considering the reasons provided in the affidavit. 2. Whether the rejection of the assessee's application for registration under Section 12A(i)(ac)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) by the CIT(E) was justified, or if the assessee should be granted an opportunity to present its case on merits. 3. Whether the rejection of the assessee's application for approval under Section 80G(5)(iii) of the Act by the CIT(E) was justified, or if the assessee should be granted an opportunity to present its case on merits. Assessee's contentions: The assessee argued that the delay was not intentional or malafide, citing issues with email communication and staff changes. For the substantive issues, the assessee contended that the CIT(E) passed orders in limine without considering the merits and prayed for an opportunity to place all required documents and regular registration before the CIT(E). The assessee also submitted that it had provisional approval under Section 12(A)(1) and undertook to provide necessary documents. Revenue's contentions: The revenue did not raise any objections regarding the condonation of delay. For the substantive issues, the revenue did not raise any specific objections to the assessee's prayer for an opportunity to be heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A,Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, AM

For Appellant: Shri G. Banerjee, AR
For Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR
Hearing: 24.06.2025Pronounced: 25.06.2025

1. These are appeals preferred by the assessee against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) Kolkata [hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(E)”] dated 23.11.2023 & 31.10.2023.

2. At the outset, it is noticed that the appeals have been filed by the assessee after a delay of 450 days in and 473 days in for this the assessee has filed an affidavit in both the appeals. The affidavit in ITA No. 836/KOL/2025 is as follows: -

1.

I am a Director of R.C. Bothra Foundation having PAN AALCR1367D and Registered Office at 2/7, Sarat Bose Road, 9th Floor, Unit-A, Kolkata-700020 (CIN U85100WB2021NPL246443) and am aware of the following facts and am competent to declare the same.

2.

The e-mail of address the company namely bera-headoffice@bothragroup.com previously given in the Income Tax portal became defunct. Two other e-mail addresses namely headoffice@bothragroup.com and bothragroupit1@yahoo.in were used and given in MCA portal and Return of Income respectively. These mail addresses are functional till now.

3.

For commercial exigency, the registered office of the company was changed from 2, Clive Ghat Street, 6th Floor, Room No. 6, Kolkata-700001 and shifted to 2/7, Sarat Bose Road, 9th Floor, Unit A, Kolkata-700020. 4. A Senior Office Assistant who used to look after the legal compliance formalities left service of other group companies under our management and this resulted to great difficulty to the management of the company R.C. Bothra Foundation. 5. The order of Rejection of Application for Registration prayed u/s. 12A dt. 31.10.2023 was not noticed in e-mail and no other communication was ever received by the management of R.C. Bothra Foundation until end of February, 2025. 6. For failure of communication as well as dissertation of staff and due to lack of experience and knowledge, proper compliance and timely filing of appeal under Income Tax Act, 1961 could not be made. There are delays in filing of appeal but these delays are not intentional, malafide deliberate, willful or out of negligence. The above are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Sd/- (KAVITA BOTHRA) DEPONENT” 03. On perusal of the affidavit, the reason for delay in filing the appeal seems to be genuine and bonafide. The Ld. D.R did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. Keeping in view, the affidavit in both the appeals as well as judicial pronouncement that the case

16.

Going over the order passed as well as the facts of the case, we are inclined to restore the appeal of the assessee before the ld. CIT (E) to pass a fresh order after giving an opportunity to the assessee to place all those documents necessary to grant registration. The Ld. CIT (E) directed to pass a fresh order after hearing the assessee.

17.

In the result, both the above appeals are hereby allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 25.06.2025.

More judgments on Section 12A

All 6,064 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →