EARTH CHARITABLE FOUNDATION,PUNE vs. CIT(EXEMTPITON), PUNE, PUNE

There is a delay of 124 days in filing of this appeal before the Tribunal for which the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay along with affidavit explaining the reasons for such delay. He submitted that the delay is not intentional and is a bonafide one for the reasons beyond the control of the assessee as evident from the reason stated in affidavit filed in support thereof and therefore prayed that the delay may be condoned and the appeal be admitted for adjudication.

1 The Ld. DR, on the other hand, opposed the arguments advanced by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee.

3 In light of the above reason stated by the assessee in his affidavit, we find some merit in the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that there was a reasonable cause in not filing the appeal before the Tribunal within the stipulated time.

5 We find recently the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Inder Singh Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 339 has held as under: “14. There can be no quarrel on the settled principle of law that delay cannot be condoned without sufficient cause, but a major aspect which has to be kept in mind is that, if in a particular case, the merits have to be examined, it should not be scuttled merely on the basis of limitation.”

6 Considering the totality of facts and in the circumstances of the case set out above and respectfully following the above decision(s) of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, we hereby condone the delay in filing of the appeal and admit the same for adjudication.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : “1. The Id CIT Exemption erred in law and on facts in rejection of application for Registration u/s 12A(1)(ac) (ii) and cancelling provisional registration granted on 27.05.2021 without considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The appellant prays for opportunity so as to explain its case. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify or substitute any ground of appeal at the time of hearing.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on receipt of the assessee’s application filed in Form No. 10AB u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act along with annexures thereto, with a view to verify the genuineness of the activities of the assessee and compliance to requirements of any other law for the time being in force, the Ld. CIT(E) issued notice on 06.06.2024 through ITBA portal/email which was duly served on the assessee requesting the assessee to upload certain information/clarification contained therein by 21.06.2024. Since the assessee failed to comply to the said notice, the assessee was served with 4 another show cause notice dated 02.08.2024 seeking compliance by 12.08.2024. Since there was no response from the side of the assessee despite sufficient opportunities granted, the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application and also cancelled the provisional registration granted earlier by observing as under: “5. The information / details were called for under the provisions of section 12AB(1)(b)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. These are the basic details required to ascertain the overall nature of the activities of the assessee and are directly relevant to the present proceedings. However, the assessee has failed to comply despite giving sufficient opportunities as discussed above including an opportunity of being heard.

Thus, the assessee has failed to furnish the details called for under the provisions of section 12AB(1)(b)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to verify the genuineness of activities of the trust / institution and to verify the compliance to requirements of any other law for the time being in force by the trust/institution as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects.

In absence of the compliance to the above requirement, it is not possible to arrive at any conclusion about the genuineness of activities of the assessee and the compliance to the requirements of any other law for the time being in force by the trust / institution as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects.

It is clear from the above that the assessee was given sufficient opportunity to comply, but it has not complied to the same. It seems that the assessee is not having any supporting documents / evidence to submit. The assessee has failed to comply with the provisions of section 12AB(1)(b)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Hence, the undersigned is unable to draw any satisfactory conclusion about genuineness of activities of the assessee and the compliance to the requirements of any other law for the time being in force by the trust / institution as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects. Therefore, the undersigned has left no alternative but to reject the application.

In view of the above, the application filed by the assessee is hereby rejected and the provisional registration granted on 27/05/2021 under section 12AB read with section 12A(1)(ac) (vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is hereby cancelled.”

Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and all the grounds of appeal relate thereto.

The Ld. AR, at the outset, submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the assessee’s application for registration under section 12A of the Act on account of non-compliance of the notice(s) issued by him. Referring to the contents of the affidavit of the assessee (reproduced in para 2.2 above in this order), the Ld. AR submitted that there were multiple applications filed by the assessee for registration which led to the confusion in the mind of the assessee and therefore it took time to resolve the issue and file the appeal against the correct application rejected by the Ld. CIT(E). The non-compliance before the Ld. CIT(E) was not intentional and therefore she prayed that in the interest of 5 justice, the assessee may be provided with an opportunity to present and substantiate its case before the Ld. CIT(E) by filing all the requisite details/ documents to his satisfaction and requested that the matter may be restored back to his file for fresh adjudication on merits.

The Ld. DR had no objection the above request of the Ld. AR.

We have heard the Ld. Representatives of the parties and perused the records. It is an admitted fact that due to non-compliance to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(E) and unavailability of the supporting evidence/ documents, the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the assessee’s application for grant of registration u/s 12A of the Act and also cancelled the provisional registration granted earlier. It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that given an opportunity, the assessee is in a position to substantiate its case by filing all the relevant supporting details/documents/ evidence before the Ld. CIT(E) to his satisfaction. Considering the totality of the facts and in the circumstances of the assessee’s case, we are of the view that it would be judicially expedient and in the interest of justice and fair play, if the matter is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) to consider the assessee’s application for registration afresh and decide the same on merits, in accordance with fact and law after allowing a one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to present and substantiate its case. Needless to say, the assessee shall provide the requisite support to the Ld. CIT(E) in terms of submitting the relevant details/documentary evidence as may be required/called upon on the appointed date without seeking adjournment under any pretext unless for required for sufficient cause, failing which the Ld. CIT(E) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We order accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are therefore allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, the appeal of assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. दिभ गीय प्रदिदनदि, आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण, “ए” बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 5. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File.