SHREE JAIN SWETAMBER TEERAPANTH MAHILA MANDAL GANGASHAHAR,BIKANER vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

The appeals were filed with a delay of 163 days. The assessee-trust filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for delay. The Ld.DR has not made any & 785Jodh/2024 SwetamberTeerapanthMahila Mandal objection on the same. We find there is sufficient cause for delay in filing the appeals. Therefore, the delay of 163 days is condoned, and the appeals admitted for adjudication.

The Ld.AR stated that the assessee applied for provisional registration and registration to the assessee trust before the Ld.CIT(E). But for contravening provisions of section 12AB(1)(b)(i)(B) of the Act, the due registrations were cancelled. When the assessee applied for alleged registration, the assessee was not registered under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959. But finally, after the passing of the impugned orders, the assessee received the said registration under section 17(1) of RPT Act, 1959 and the copy of the said registration certificate dated 01/08/2024 is placed on the record.

The Ld.DR had verified the certificate, and had not made any objection against the submission of the assessee.

We find that the assessee’s application under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act, relating to and the cancellation order for provisional registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the Act, relating to ITA No. 785/Jodh/2024, were both occasioned due to the absence of the requisite registration certificate.It is now brought on record that the assessee has obtained the registration certificate under the RPT Act, 1959. Consequently, the assessee is no longer in default of the provisions of section 12AB(1)(b)(i)(B) of the Act. Accordingly, we direct that both the applications be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(E). The Ld. CIT(E) shall verify the said certificate issued under the RPT Act, 1959, and thereafter grant registration to the assessee in accordance with law.