ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION CIRCLE), VIJAYAWADA vs. VISAKHAPATNAM URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, VISAKHAPATNAM

It is submitted that the delay in filing appeal is neither wanton nor willful, but only because of the above reasons.

In view of the above, it is humbly prayed that this Hon'ble ITAT may be please to condone the delay of 09 days in filing the above appeal.”

On perusal of the contents of the affidavit filed by the revenue as well as the submission of the Ld. DR, we find that the revenue is prevented by a reasonable and sufficient cause in filing the appeals beyond the prescribed time limit with a delay of 9 days. Therefore, we hereby condone the delay of 9 days in filing the appeals before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeals on merits in the following paragraphs.

Since the grounds raised by the revenue for all these appeals are identical in nature, both for the income tax appeals / Fringe Benefit Tax appeals, these appeals are being clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order being passed. We now take up the appeal in for the A.Y.2005-06 as a lead appeal and the facts are culled out therefrom.

Brief facts of the case are that, assessee was registered as a charitable institution under section 12AA of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) filed his return of income for the A.Y. 2005-06 on 26.10.2005 by admitting a total income of Rs. (-) 2,23,71,199/-. Subsequently, assessee revised its return of income on 03.12.2007 declaring total income of Rs. (-) 2.23.71.199/-. Ld.Assessing Officer [hereinafter in short “Ld. AO"] completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act on 28.12.2007 by assessing the total income at Rs. (-) 2,21,50,483/-. Subsequently, CCIT(OSD) cancelled the 12AA registration of the assessee vide order dated 04.05.2012. On appeal, the Hon’ble ITAT, Visakhapatnam vide its order dated 20.03.2020 restored the registration under section 12AA of the Act. Meanwhile, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Hyderabad (in short “Ld.CIT(E)”) passed an order under section 263 of the Act on 31.03.2015 directing the Ld. AO to make fresh assessment against which assessee also on appeal before the ITAT, Visakhapatnam. In consequence to order under section 263 of the Act, Ld. AO made various additions. The Tribunal has set-aside the 263 order of the Ld.CIT(E) on the basis of which order in dated 20.03.2020 restoring of Registration under section 12AA of the Act. Since the order of the Ld.CIT(E) under section 263 of the Act was set aside, the consequential order passed under section 143 r.w.s. 263 of the Act become

On being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), revenue is in appeal before us by raising following grounds of appeal: - “1. Whether the CIT(A) is correct in allowing the grounds of the assessee basingITAT order restoring the 12AA registration without going into merits of the case.

We have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record as well as the orders of the Ld. Revenue Authorities and also the decisions relied on by the both the Learned Counsels. Before us, the Ld. DR pleaded for remitting the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) since the Ld.CIT(A) did not consider the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT (E) v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (supra) and passed the order. The Ld. AR also did not object to the submission of the Ld.DR for remitting the matter back to the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we set-aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) for the assessment year under consideration and remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to consider the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT (E) v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (supra) in the light of the facts and circumstances of the present case and pass a detailed speaking order. It is ordered accordingly.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above.

The grounds raised by the revenue in all these Income Tax appeals are identical to grounds raised in for the A.Y. 2005-06, accordingly the decision in ITA No. 381/VIZ/2024 shall mutatis mutandis applies to ITA Nos.382, 385, 386, 388 to 396/VIZ/2024.

The grounds raised by the revenue in all these Fringe Benefit Tax appeals are identical to grounds raised in for the A.Y. 2005-06, accordingly the decision in ITA No. 381/VIZ/2024 shall mutatis mutandis applies to ITA Nos.383, 384 & 387/VIZ/2024.

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes.

To sum-up, all the appeals filed by the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes.