Loading judgment…
Facts
There was a delay of 267 days in filing the appeal due to the assessee's husband's serious illness requiring hospitalization. The assessee's counsel explained that due to this, they could not coordinate with professionals to file the appeal on time. The CIT(Exemptions) passed an ex-parte order without considering the merits.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay, stating that substantial justice should prevail over technicalities, citing the Apex Court in Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. MST.Katiji & Ors. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, and the matter was restored to the CIT(Exemptions) for fresh proceedings, with a condition of cooperation from the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether to condone the significant delay in filing the appeal and whether to restore the matter to the CIT(Exemptions) for fresh consideration of the application for registration.
Sections Cited
80G
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE
Before: SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU & SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV
PER PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
The present appeal of the assessee is arising from the order of ld. CIT(Exemptions) dated 21.8.2024.
There is a delay of 267 days in filing the present appeal. Explaining the cause of delay, the counsel for the assessee has pointed out that the husband of the assessee was seriously ill and admitted in hospital due to Coronary Angiogram and he was advised for full bed rest, because of which the assessee could not be able to coordinate with the professionals and the delay has happened.
The ld. D.R. opposed the prayer of condonation of delay.
Vishala Rural Women and Children Development Organization, Bijapur Page 2 of 3 4. Considering the submissions of the AR and material on record, we hereby condone the delay in the present appeal and proceed to decide the appeal on merits. Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. MST.Katiji & Ors., (167 ITR 471) (SC) has held that when technical consideration and substantial justice pitted against each other the cause of substantial justice would prevail.
At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee has craved one more opportunity before the CIT (Exemptions). Ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that the present appeal is filed against the order of CIT(Exemptions), denying the registration u/s 80G of the Act to the assessee trust. He further pointed out that the assessee has duly couriered the documents to the office of CIT(Exemptions). However, the same were returned as not accepted by the courier company due to which nobody from the side of assessee has been able to explain the case of the assessee.
Ld. D.R. relied upon the order of authorities below.
After considering the rival submissions, we observe that the impugned order of ld. CIT(Exemptions) is an ex-parte order passed against the assessee without dealing with the merits. The ld. CIT(Exemptions) observed that despite granting reasonable opportunities, nobody from the side of assessee, the Ld CIT(E) further observed that no reply has been filed before the ld. CIT(Exemptions). We observe that the counsel for the assessee has produced a courier receipt and a compilation of various documents with a covering letter dated 1.7.2024. However, the same was not able to reach to the office of ld. CIT(Exemptions) because of the technical reasons occurred in courier company. Therefore, considering the totality of the facts, we are of the view that one more opportunity to the assessee may be Vishala Rural Women and Children Development Organization, Bijapur Page 3 of 3 granted in the interest of justice. Hence, the matter is restored to the file of CIT(Exemptions) with a condition that assessee would cooperate in the fresh proceedings and will not take unnecessary adjournments.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 20th Nov, 2024