BETHANY NAVAJEEVAN PROVINCE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 661/COCH/2023Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 May 2025AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal found the reasons provided for the delay to be too general and not constituting a reasonable cause. Citing precedence, the tribunal dismissed the appeal on the grounds of limitation. The connected duplicate appeal was also dismissed as infructuous.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the denial of deduction under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act. There was a delay of 125 days in filing the appeal, for which the assessee sought condonation, citing the busy schedule of their Chartered Accountants.

What were the issues?

Whether there was a reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal to warrant condonation of delay.

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(1)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, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN

Before: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

Pronounced: 30.05.2025

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No.661/Coch/2023
ITA No.657/Coch/2023

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

: Asst.Year 2017-2018 Bethany Navajeevan Province The Asst.Commissioner of Provincial Ashram, v. Income-tax, Nalanchira Post (Exemption) Trivandrum. Trivandrum – 695 015. PAN : AAATB7341M. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sri.P.V.Chacko, CA Respondent by : Smt.Leena Lal, Sr.AR Date of Pronouncement : 30.05.2025 Date of Hearing : 27.05.2025. O R D E R

Per Prakash Chand Yadav, JM :

1.

The present appeals of the assessee arising from the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption) [“CIT(E)” for short] dated 30.12.2019 and relates to the denial of deduction u/s.12AA of the Act.

2.

At the outset, we observe that there is a delay of 125 days in the present appeal, for which the learned Counsel for the assessee has drawn attention to the Bench towards an affidavit filed in support of the prayer for condonation of delay. For the sake of convenience, we reproduce the contention of the assessee hereunder:-

-657/Coch/2023. Bethany Navajeevan Province. “The appellant had entrusted the filing of appeal with M/s.P.C.Chacko, Chartered Accountants, Ernakulam, and due to their busy work with filing of 10B of 12A institutions, they could prepare it only by the last week of the prescribed time limit i.e., on 14.09.2023.”

3.

The learned DR strongly opposed the prayer of the assessee for condonation of delay.

4.

After considering the rival submissions, perusal of the the reasons given by the assessee with respect to the delay in the filing of appeal are too general in nature and do not constitute reasonable cause . These types of reasons have been strongly criticized by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ornate Traders reported in 312 ITR 193(Bom). Further we cannot shut our eyes from the fact that assessee has not made any complaint against the chartered account for misleading him. Therefore, we hereby dismiss this appeal on the grounds of limitation itself.

6.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed. Order pronounced on this 30th day of May, 2025.

Similar judgments

Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.

More judgments on Section 12AA

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

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →