SHRI JINAM EDUCATION AND CHARITABLE TRUST,NAKHATRANA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD
Facts
The assessee filed an application for registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in Form No. 10AB. The Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application on grounds of non-satisfaction of the genuineness of the trust's activities. The appeal was filed with a delay of 634 days.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay of 634 days, holding that the delay was due to reasons attributable to the previous tax consultant and the need to find a new consultant. The Tribunal also found that the assessee now possesses all the required documents.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned, and whether the matter should be remitted back to the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication on merits.
Sections Cited
12AB, 12A(1)(ac)(iii)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT
Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINIAND SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA
आदेश/Order Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, A.M Captioned appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order
passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax(Exemption)-Ahmedabad
[(in short “the Ld.CIT(E)”] vide order dated 03/03/2023, wherein the Ld.
CIT(E) rejected the application of assessee filed by the assessee in Form
No.10AB, for registration u/s 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short
“the Act”).
Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows:
ITA No. 68/Rjt/2025 2 Sh. Janam Education & Charitable Trust “1. The Learned CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad has erred in law and facts, in rejecting the application in Form 10AB u/s 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on Non-satisfaction of genuineness of the activity of the trust.
The Learnd CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad erred in passing the ex-parte order dated 03.03.2023, rejecting the application filed in Form 10AB for seeking fresh registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the I.T. Act, 1961 without providing sufficient opportunity of being heard and thus the order is bad in law and illegal.
The appellant craves leave to add, alter and amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.”
The appeal filed by the assessee before the Tribunal is barred by
limitation of 634 days. The assessee moved a petition for condonation of
delay requesting the Bench to condone the delay. The Ld. Counsel for the
assessee explained the sufficient reasons stating that assessee was
exercising alternative remedy and therefore the delay of 634 days has
occurred. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee also submitted that the matter
relevant to registration of the trust was handed over to previous tax
consultant, who in turn did not take care of the matter and the application
filed by him before Ld.CIT(E) was rejected because wrong filing of
application and without containing required details. Thereafter assessee
again applied for fresh registration u/s 12AB of the Act by filing Form-
10AB through another tax consultant. In this process, the delay of 634
days occurred. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee invited our attention to
the affidavit filed by Shri Panchubha Visaji Jadeja, trustee of assessee-
trust, which is reproduced below:
“1. The Trust was provisionally registered on dated 27.05.2021 for the period AY 2021-22 to AY 2023-24 vide Regi. No.AAHTS9182LE20206.
ITA No. 68/Rjt/2025 3 Sh. Janam Education & Charitable Trust 2. For the renewal of the trust we had handed over this matter to our previous tax consultant Mr. Haresh Thakker who had filed Form 10AB on dated 29.09.2022 and the same is rejected vide rejection order dated order dated 03.03.2023 on account of non-submission of the requisite details, genuineness of activities of the trust not get established. 3. Without knowing amended legal provisions of the registration, he had again filed fresh application in Form 10AB on good belief that trust will get another chance and will get registration certificate but application filed on dated 01.06.2024 in Form 10AB is rejected on dated 19.12.2024, on ground that earlier application filed u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) is rejected vide order dated 03.03.2023, and also provisional registration dated 27.05.2021 is also cancelled. Hence, we are filing this appeal against the rejection order passed on dated 03.03.2023. Our application dated 01.06.2024 is rejected on dated 19.12.2024 and then we were searching for the tax consultant who appear before the Hon’ble ITAT as my tax consultant is not appearing before the Hon’ble ITAT. Afte immediately finding the tax consultant and as per the advice given by him we are filing the appeal before the Hon’ble ITAT against the order dated 03.03.2023, passed by the CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad.”
On the other hand, Ld. CIT-DR for the Revenue opposed the prayer
of the assessee for condonation of delay and stated that delay should not
be condoned on such flimsy reasons because it is the duty of the assessee
to take care that the application should be filed in the correct Form and
correct details should have been filed in Form-10AB of the Actand
because of the carelessness of the assessee there is wasting of time and
resources of Ld.CIT(E). Therefore, cost of Rs.10,000/- should be imposed
on the assessee on account of negligence of the assessee. The Ld. CIT-DR
also stated that assessee has failed to explain the sufficient cause for
condonation of delay. Therefore, delay should not be condoned and
appeal of assessee should be dismissed.
ITA No. 68/Rjt/2025 4 Sh. Janam Education & Charitable Trust 5. We have heard both the parties on the preliminary issue. We find
that first application filed by the assessee-trust in Form-10AB was
rejected because the details filed in Form-10AB was wrongly filed by the
previous tax consultant and the previous tax consultant did not take care
in filing Form-10AB correctly. We find that because of the mistake on the
part of previous tax consultant, the assessee should not be
penalized.When the first application in Form-10AB was rejected then
assessee filed correct application in Form-10AB containing all the details
and in this process the delay of 634 days occurred. We are of the
considered view that assessee has explained sufficient cause and
therefore delay needs to be condoned.
We are of the view that provisions of law have to be adhered strictly
and that one cannot be allowed to act in leisure and make a mockery of
enacted law, because law and provisions are laid down to benefit both
sides of litigation. Be that as it may, we have to do justice and the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs Mst.
Katiji and others, reported in 167 ITR 471, (1988) SC 897) (7) observed
as follows:
“4. When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred for the other side cannot claim to have vested right in injustice being done because of a non- deliberate delay……...”
When we weigh these two aspects then the side of justice becomes
heavier and casts a duty on us to deliver justice. We note that the
reasons given in the affidavit for condonation of delay, was convincing,
ITA No. 68/Rjt/2025 5 Sh. Janam Education & Charitable Trust and the reason would constitute reasonable and sufficient cause for the
delay in filing this appeal. Considering the above facts and circumstances
of the case, as narrated above, we are of the considered opinion that in
the interest of justice, the delay deserves to be condoned and to decide
the appeal of assessee on merits in accordance with law. Accordingly, we
condone the delay and admit the appeal of the assessee to adjudicate on
merit.
At the outset Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that during
proceedings before Ld.CIT(E) the assessee could not submit certain
details and documents because these details and documents were not
available when the proceedings before Ld. CIT(E) was going-on.
Therefore, assessee could not submit the required details and documents
for registration. However, now the assessee has in it possession entire
documents and details which are to be submitted before Ld.CIT(E).
Therefore, the matter may be remitted back to the file of Ld.CIT(E) for de
novo adjudication.
On the other hand, Ld. CIT-DR for the Revenue submitted that
assessee was negligent in submitting the details and documents before
Ld.CIT(E) despite giving lot of opportunities to the assessee. Therefore,
assessee is simply wasting time and resources of Ld.CIT(E). Therefore,
Ld.CIT-DR strongly submitted that heavy cost should be imposed on the
assessee if the matter is to be remitted back to the file of Ld.CIT(E).
ITA No. 68/Rjt/2025 6 Sh. Janam Education & Charitable Trust 10. We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available
on record. We note that Ld.CIT(E) has denied the registration u/s 12AB of
the Act mainly on the reason that assessee has failed to submit the
relevant details and documents for verification of Ld.CIT(E).The Ld.CIT(E)
has given ample opportunities to the assessee to submit the details and
documents. However, the assessee-trust did not take care to submit the
required details and document like activities of trust, objects of the trust
and other details as required by the Ld.CIT(E). Since assessee-trust has
failed to submit these details and documents before Ld.CIT(E), therefore,
Ld.CIT(E) dismissed the application of assessee in Form-10AB for
registration u/s 12AB of the Act stating that assessee-trust has failed to
file documentary evidence to satisfy about the genuineness of the trust
activities and to verify these activities whether they are in consonance
with its objects.
11 The Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted before us that the
required details and documents were not available with the assessee
readily when the proceedings were going on before Ld.CIT(E). However,
now these details and documents are available with the assessee. The Ld.
Counel of the assessee contended that one more opportunity should be
given to assessee to submit these details and documents before
Ld.CIT(E). Therefore, the matter may be remitted back to the file of
Ld.CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. We find that assessee could not submit
the required details and documents before Ld.CIT(E) because these
ITA No. 68/Rjt/2025 7 Sh. Janam Education & Charitable Trust details and documents, which were required by the Ld.CIT(E), were not
available with the assessee-trust at the time when the proceedings were
going on. Now, before us Ld. Counsel stated that assessee has entire
details and documents with it and which are to be submitted before
Ld.CIT(E). Considering these fact we are of the view that on more
opportunity should be given to assessee to plead its case before Ld.CIT(E)
on account of non-compliance attitude of the assessee, we impose cost
of Rs.10,000/- (Rupes ten thousand) on the assessee, which is to be
deposited in the Prime Minister National Relief Fund.Therefore, we set
aside the order passed by Ld.CIT(E) and remit the issue back to the file of
Ld.CIT(E) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law.Needless to direct
that before passing order afresh, the Ld.CIT(E) shall allow reasonable
opportunity to the assessee we also direct the assessee to be more
vigilant and to make timely compliance of the notice issued by Ld.CIT(E).
With these directions, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee is
allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 29 /04/2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (DINESH MOHAN SINHA) (DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI) �याियक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER राजकोट /Rajkot Gदनांक/ Date:29/04/2025 DKP Outsourcing Sr.P.S
ITA No. 68/Rjt/2025 8 Sh. Janam Education & Charitable Trust
आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : • अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant • ��यथ�/ The Respondent • आयकर आयु�/ CIT • आयकर आयु�(अपील)/ The CIT(A) • िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, राजकोट/ DR, ITAT, RAJKOT • गाड&फाईल/ Guard File
By order/आदेश से,
सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपीलBय अLधकरण ,राजकोट
