LOTHADA PIPLANA PADAVALA INDUSTRIAL ASSOCIATION,RAJKOT vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

3. Your Honor’s appellant craves leave to add, to amend, alter, or withdraw any or more grounds of appeal on or before the hearing of appeal. Since these two appeals filed by the same assessee are directed against the separate order passed by Ld. CIT (E) for different applications. Since the issue of rejection of application are same there for these two appeals have been heard together and consolidated order is being passed for the convenience and brevity. First we will adjudicate ITA NO. 239/Rjt/2024. Since both the appeals are filed on 19/04/2024. late by 109 days and 89 days respectively, That the reason for condonation of delay is same. The relevant para of the application is :

LOTHADA -PIPLANA-PADAVALA INDUSTRIAL ASSOCATION

Para No. 5: “I am a senior citizen and less educated and completely unaware about online system of compliance and e-mail tracking and for which I relied upon the accountant who could not timely inform me and has left the job which has resulted into delay in filing appeal before your honors which may please be condoned.” Para No. 6: “That the delay was not willful or deliberate and that the appeal documents are Bonafide. The substantial merits of the case justify condonation of delay.”

The AR submitted that the assessee is senior citizen less educated and completely unaware about the online system of compliance and completely depend on the accountant for computer operation. That the accountants has non co-operated with the assessee. Hence the assessee could not reply to the notices issued by the department and prayed for an opportunity to be given to explain the case before Ld. CIT(E) The delay was not willful or deliberate and that the appeal documents are Bonafide. Substantial merits of the case justify condonation of the delay.”

(i) On the contrary DR submitted and relied on the order of Ld. CIT(E) However Ld. DR has not objected to the prayer of the assessee.

We have heard both the parties and perused all the material available on records. We note that the assessee could not established sufficient course for condonation of delay in filing the appeals. However, we impose a LOTHADA -PIPLANA-PADAVALA INDUSTRIAL ASSOCATION consolidated cost of Rs. 5000/- on the assessee and the same has to be deposited with Prime Minister Relief Fund within 10 days from today. In the interest of justice, we condone the delay in filing of the present appeals and both the appeals are heard on merit.

The brief facts of the case in that the application was filed electronically on 08/05/2023 in form no. 12AB within the meaning of section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) income-tax of the Act 1961. The notices was issued to the assessee on 30/09/2023 & 11/10/2023 sent throw ITBA portal to furnish certain details/documents. The assessee has neither filed any submission nor sought any adjournment in this case in the absence of requisite detail, a present case decided on the basis of material available on records. The Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application of the assessee stating that

Feeling aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(E) the assessee has filed an appeal before us.

LOTHADA -PIPLANA-PADAVALA INDUSTRIAL ASSOCATION

(i) Ld. AR of the assessee filed written submission: “The director of the appellant is 68 years of age, a senior citizen and less educated and completely unaware about online systems of compliance and e-mail tracking and for which I relied upon the accountant who could not timely inform me and has left the job.

(ii) On the contrary Ld. DR submitted that assessee has not submitted the documents before the authority, the assessee trusts a non-co-operative attitude in compliance with the notice issued by the department.

We have heard both the parties and perused all the material available on records. We note that the Ld.CIT(E) has issued notices on 30/09/2023, 11/10/2023 asking for document in support of the appeal of registration the Act in order to know about the geniuses of the activities of the trust and also to verify the activities are in consonance with the object of the trust and it was also to ensur that purpose of achieving objects are complied with, but the assessee failed to comply with terms of the notice. That the assessee submitted before us. The reasons for non-compliance was that the assessee was compleately unaware about the online system of non-compliance. The Ld. AR of the assessee assured us about compliance to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(E) considering the facts and circumstance of the case and in the interest of the justice. We restore the matter back with the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for De-novo adjudication of the application in form 10AB section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the income-tax Act. Assessee was directed to submitted the relevant document and evidence as required by Ld. CIT(E) if any.

LOTHADA -PIPLANA-PADAVALA INDUSTRIAL ASSOCATION Since the facts circumstance of the case similar and the assessee failed to comply with the terms of notice. The is disposed of in the above terms. In combined result the appeal filed by the assessee in &240/Rjt/2024 are allowed for statical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 09/ 06/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. A.L. SAINI) (DINESH MOHAN SINHA) ACCOUNT MEMBER JUDICAL MEMBER