Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee trust filed appeals with a significant delay of 577 and 574 days against the rejection of their registrations under sections 12AB and 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act. The delay was attributed to a Tax Consultant's non-compliance with hearing notices.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay, imposed a cost of Rs. 5,000/- on the assessee, and directed the CIT(E) to provide one more opportunity for hearing to grant the registrations.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing appeals against the rejection of registration under sections 12AB and 80G(5) should be condoned, and if so, under what conditions.
Sections Cited
12AB, 80G(5)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH
Before: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha
Nagnath Mahadev CIT (Exemption), A-15, Shree Nagnath Ahmedabad Mahadev Mandir, Vs Okha Mandal Dwarka, Devbhumi Dwarka-361345 Dwarka, Gujarat PAN: AABTN8147N (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessee Represented: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.R. Revenue Represented: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 23-06-2025 Date of pronouncement : 25-06-2025 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-
These two appeals are filed by the Assessee as against rejection of registrations under section 12AB and under section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) vide orders dated 25.07.2023 & 22.07.2023 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad.
& 822/Ahd/2025 Page No 2 Nagnath Mahadev vs. CIT(E)
The registry has noted that there is a delay of 577 days and 574 days in filing the above appeals by the assessee Trust. The trustee of the assessee filed a Notarized Affidavit explaining that the Trust have entrusted the task as obtaining registrations u/s. 12AB & u/s. 80G of the Act to a Tax Consultant at Dwarka. The said Tax Consultant after making applications have not complied to the hearing notices given by Ld. CIT(E), which has resulted in rejecting registration of the Trust. When one of the Trustee enquired with the Chartered Accountant at Jamnagar, the status of the applications made before Ld. CIT(E), it came to light the rejection order passed by Ld. CIT(E). It is thereafter the appeals were filed with a delay of 577 days and 574 days. The Assessee Trust is not benefitted by late filing of these appeals but however the unawareness of statutory appeals is the reason for the delay and however undertake to file all relevant materials before Ld. CIT(E) by providing one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee Trust.
The Ld. CIT-DR appearing for the Revenue stated that substantial delay in filing the above appeals, hence cost may be imposed on the assessee.
We have given our thoughtful consideration and perused the materials available on record. Ld. Counsel Shri Chetan Agarwal appearing for the Assessee specifically undertook that trust will file all required details, documents before Ld. CIT(E) for the purpose of granting registration u/s. 12AB and u/s. 80G(5) of the Act.
& 822/Ahd/2025 Page No 3 Nagnath Mahadev vs. CIT(E)
Recording the above submissions of both parties and to meet the ends of justice, we impose a cost of Rs. 5,000/- payable by the assessee Trust to the Income Tax Department within two weeks of receipt of copy of this order and producing challan for payment of cost, Ld. CIT(E) is directed to give one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee Trust for granting registrations u/s. 12AB and u/s. 80G(5) of the Act and in accordance with the provisions of law.
In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.