Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed two appeals against the orders of the CIT (Exemptions) dated 20/11/2024, which dismissed applications for registration under Section 12AB and approval under Section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act. There was a delay of 118 days in filing the appeals, which the assessee sought to have condoned due to non-receipt of the impugned orders.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals, finding reasonable cause. It noted that the CIT (Exemptions) had rejected the assessee's applications without considering the replies and relevant documents submitted. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT (Exemptions)'s orders and remanded the matters for fresh consideration, requiring an appropriate opportunity of hearing and consideration of all relevant records.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT (Exemptions) mechanically rejected applications for registration and approval under Sections 12AB and 80G(5) without considering the assessee's submissions; and whether the delay in filing appeals should be condoned.
Sections Cited
12AB, 80G(5)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘ DB-B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad
Before: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-Shri Madhusudan Sawdia
ORDER
Per Vijay Pal Rao, Vice President These 2 appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of the learned CIT (Exemptions), Hyderabad both dated, 20/11/2024 whereby the application of the assessee for registration u/s 12AB and approval u/s 80G(5) of the I.T. Act were dismissed.
2. There is a delay of 118 days in filing both the appeals by the assessee. The assessee has filed petition for condonation of delay which are supported by the affidavits of the assessee.
We have heard the learned Counsel for the assessee as well as the learned DR on the condonation of delay and carefully perused the reasons explained in the petition for delay in filing these appeals. The assessee has explained the cause of delay that the impugned orders passed by the CIT (Exemptions) were not served on the assessee, but the Chartered Accountant of the assessee who files the return of income found on the Portal that the orders rejecting the application for registration as well as approval were passed on 20/11/2024. The assessee has stated in the petition that the assessee did not receive the impugned order either in the mail or physically and therefore, only when the C.A of the assessee who filed the return of income informing the assessee that the orders are being passed by the CIT (Exemptions) rejecting the applications of the assessee, the assessee came to know about the impugned orders and filed the present appeal. We further note that in response to the notices issued by the CIT (Exemptions) the assessee filed the reply and the acknowledgment of the same is placed in paper book whereas the CIT (Exemptions) has stated in para 3 of the impugned order that there is no compliance from the assessee to the notice issued by it. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, we are satisfied that there was a reasonable cause of delay in filing the appeals and further the impugned orders were passed without considering the relevant record and reply filed by the assessee. Accordingly, we condone the delay of 118 days in filing the present appeal.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeals:
“1. The order of rejection for approval under section 12AB of the Act, passed by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax [Exemption], Hyderabad, dated 20/11/2024, in so far as it is against the Appellant is opposed to law, equity, weight of evidence, probabilities and the facts and circumstances in the Appellant’s case.
2. Whether the learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions), Hyderabad, is justified in mechanically rejecting the application filed by the Appellant for registration of the Appellant Trust under section 12AB of the Act, under the facts and circumstances of the case.
3. Whether the learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions), Hyderabad, is justified in mechanically rejecting the application filed by the Appellant Trust under section 12AB stating that non submission of mandatory information to verify the genuineness of activities of the trust and expenditure of the trust towards objectives, under the facts and circumstances of the case.
4. The Appellant craves leave of this Honorable Tribunal to add, alter, delete or substitute any or all of the grounds urged above, at the time of hearing of the appeal by this Honorable Tribunal.
5. In the view of the above and other grounds that may be urged at the time of the hearing of the appeal, the Appellant prays that the appeal may be allowed in the interest of justice and equity.”
“1. The order of rejection for approval under section 80G of the Act, passed by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax [Exemption], Hyderabad, dated 20/11/2024, in so far as it is against the Appellant is opposed to law, equity, weight of evidence, probabilities and the facts and circumstances in the Appellant’s case.
Whether the learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions), Hyderabad, is justified in mechanically rejecting the application filed by the Appellant for registration
Page 3 of 6 of the Appellant Trust under section 80G of the Act, under the facts and circumstances of the case.
3. Whether the learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions), Hyderabad, is justified in mechanically rejecting the application filed by the Appellant Trust under section 80G stating that non submission of mandatory information to verify the genuineness of activities of the trust and expenditure of the trust towards objectives, under the facts and circumstances of the case.
4. The Appellant craves leave of this Honorable Tribunal to add, alter, delete or substitute any or all of the grounds urged above, at the time of hearing of the appeal by this Honorable Tribunal.
5. In the view of the above and other grounds that may be urged at the time of the hearing of the appeal, the Appellant prays that the appeal may be allowed in the interest of justice and equity.”
The learned Counsel for the assessee has referred to the reply filed by the assessee in response to the notices issued by the CIT (Exemptions) and submitted that the applications of the assessee were rejected by the CIT (Exemptions) without considering the reply as well as the relevant documents filed by the ass.
On the other hand, the learned DR has relied upon the impugned orders of the learned CIT (Exemptions).
Having considered the rival submissions as well as the relevant material available on record, at the outset we note that the learned CIT (Exemptions) has rejected the application for registration u/s 12AB as well as the application for approval u/s 80G of the Act by giving an identical reasons in para 3 as under:
Page 4 of 6 “3. There is no compliance from the assessee so far to the above notice. In light of the above facts, as the application in form 10AB is to be decided in time bound manner and non- submission of mandatory information to verify the genuineness of activities of the trust and expenditure of the trust towards objectives, the present application in form 10AB for registration u/s 12AB is herewith rejected.”
3. In response to the above notice the assessee submitted partial information only. In light of the above facts, as the application in form 10AB is to be decided in time bound manner and non-submission of mandatory information to verify the genuineness of activities of the trust and expenditure of the trust towards objectives, the present application in form 10AB for registration u/s 80G is herewith rejected.
Thus, it is clear from the impugned orders that the reply as well as the documents filed by the assessee were not considered by the learned CIT (Exemptions) while passing the impugned order and rejecting the application of the assessee. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, the impugned orders of the learned CIT (Exemptions) are set aside, and the matters are remanded to the record of the learned CIT (Exemptions) for reconsideration of the applications of the assessee for registration u/s 12AB as well as approval u/s 80G of the I.T. Act after giving an appropriate opportunity of hearing to the assessee as well as considering the relevant record filed by the assessee.
In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.