Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR
Before: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM
ORDER PER: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M. This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the ld. CIT(E), Jaipur dated 30-11-2022 raising therein following grounds of appeal. ‘’That the order passed by the ld.CIT(E), Jaipur by rejecting application u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the I.T. Act, 1961 is wrong, unwarranted and bad in law. Kindly register the same.’’ 2.1 At the outset of hearing of the appeal, the Bench noticed that there was delay of 491 days in filing the appeal by the assessee foundation before the ITAT for 2 ITA842/JPR/2024 PREM SAMRIDHI FOUNDATION VS ITO,WARD-BUNDI which the ld.AR of the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay and thus prayed as under:-
1. That assessee-trust filed an appeal on 03.06.2024 against the rejection order passed by Ld. CIT (Exemption), Jaipur on rejection of approval u/s. 80G of the I.T. Act, 1961, with a delay of 491 days, which is as follows:-
S.N. Particulars Appeal No. 1. Rejection order u/s 80G approval (i.e. 80G(5)(iii)
That the delay of 491 days in filing of appeals was due to technical glitch while re-applying on the Income Tax Portal and due to technical glitch time was taken in process of reapplying of Form No. 10AB for permanent approval u/s. 80G of the Act.
That assessee-trust got permanent registration u/s. 12A of the LT. Act, 1961 on 26.09.2022. But, at the time of hearing on approval us. 80G of the Act, after 2 months the Ld. CIT (Exemption), Jaipur was insisted to registration with Devasthan Vibhag under RPT Act, 1959 and the officials of Income Tax Department advised to withdraw this application & after registration with Devasthan Vibhag apply afresh.
That the reasonable cause in delay filing of appeal was due to:- (1). The technical glitch on Income Tax Portal re-application was not possible. (ii). The CBDT vide Circular No. 6 of 2023, dated 24.05.2023 and extended the date for re-apply in case of permanent registration u/s. 12A of the L.T. Act, 1961. But, no relaxation was provided for permanent approval u/s. 80G of the Act. As, assessee-trust was not covered under this relaxation provided by CBDT vide Circular No. 6 of 2023.
3 ITA842/JPR/2024 PREM SAMRIDHI FOUNDATION VS ITO,WARD-BUNDI (iii). The time taken in process of legal advice whether the re- apply or filing of appeal, which is appropriate, as there was a lot of confusion & the Hon'ble madras High Court declared ultra virus the said circular No. 6 of 2023, dated 24.05.2023 in the case of Sri Nrisimha Priya Charitable Trust v. CBDT & Others having Writ Petition No. 27030 of 2023, Order dated 02.04.2024.
That more or less most of charitable trusts and consultants are not well-versed with the latest development of Income Tax Laws related to registration u/s. 12A & 80G of the Act. Therefore, the Parliament has amended many times in recent past to clarify the Law & CBDT has also issued around 4-5 circulars to extend the due dates & clarify the Law to remove the genuine hardship faced by the charitable trusts.
That after this, trustees consulted with another consultant who is well-versed by the latest development related to latest law related to registration of charitable trust under Section 12A & 80G of the 1.T. Act 1961, as there are many recent changes in trust related laws and after discussion with him, trustees got to know that they have to file an appeal against these rejection orders before ITAT. In view of above submission you are requested that kindly consider this as reasonable cause to condone the delay of 491 days and kindly remand back the case to CIT(Exemption), Jaipur. So, that proper inquiry can be conducted and substantial justice may be delivered to the appellant.’’ To this effect, the director of the trust Shri Padam Kumar Jain filed an affidavit deposing the above facts as to the delay made in filing the appeal before ITAT 2.2 During the course of hearing, the ld. DR objected to such an inordinate delay in filing the appeal by the assessee before ITAT. 2.3 The Bench has heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. The Bench has gone through the submissions of the ld. AR of 4 ITA842/JPR/2024 PREM SAMRIDHI FOUNDATION VS ITO,WARD-BUNDI the assessee very deeply and noted that there is delay of 491days in filing the appeal by the assessee foundation which indicates that there is technical glitch in reapplying of Form No.10AB for permanent approval u/s 80G of the Act. The object of the Bench is not to come into fuss on the issue of technical glitch but to adjudicate upon the issue on merit of the case. Hence, in such a situation, the delay so made by the assessee foundation in filing the appeal is condoned keeping in view the technical glitch in the matter. 3.1 As regards the solitary ground of appeal
of the assessee, the Bench noted that the ld.CIT(E) rejected application of the assessee trust u/s 80G of the Act by observing as under:- ‘’The applicant filed application on 02.05.2022 in Form No. 10AB seeking approval unor clause (i) of first proviso to sub- section (5) of section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The applicant was issued a letter/notice No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM43/ 2022-23/1047282486 (1) dated 14.11.2022 to furnish certain documents/ details to justify its claim for approval under clause (i) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
02. In response to the above, the applicant submitted its reply for withdrawing the application for approval under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Income Tax Act 1961 and has stated as under:- …..We are not able to provide you today the registration details with Devsthan Vibhag as it takes time to register I withdraw the application in Form 10AB for 80G 5 ITA842/JPR/2024 PREM SAMRIDHI FOUNDATION VS ITO,WARD-BUNDI 03. In the light of the above facts and applicant's request to withdraw the aforementioned application for approval under clause() of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the applicant's application for approval under clause() of first proviso to sub section (5) of section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is rejected 'in B-mine, However, the registration granted to the institution, if any, in Form No. 10AC will continue to exist till the expiry of the time period mentioned thereon unless cancelled separately as per law. Hence, the application of the applicant trust/institution is rejected as withdrawn.’’ 3.2 During the course of hearing, the ld.AR of the assessee prayed that there is no requirement of registration under Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 and it is not applicable in the case of the assessee as its registration is done under Section 8 of Companies Act. Accordingly, the registration u/s 80G should be made. However, the ld. AR of the assessee has filed following documents concerning the issue in question. S.N. Particulars Page No.
1. Affidavit of Counsel of assessee 1 –companydated 23-10-2024 2. Copy of registration u/s 12A 2-9 and approval u/s 80G in case of Naya Swera Ek Prayas Foundation 3. Copy of registration u/s 12A 10-19 and approval u/s 80G in case of Jan Vasundhara Sahitya Foundation with certificate of ROC 6 ITA842/JPR/2024 PREM SAMRIDHI FOUNDATION VS ITO,WARD-BUNDI 3.3 On the other hand, the ld. DR supported the order of the ld.CIT(E). 3.4 We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. In this case, it was prayed by the ld.AR of the assessee that there is no requirement of registration under Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 and it is not applicable in the case of the assessee as its registration is done under Section 8 of Companies Act. Accordingly, the registration u/s 80G should be made. The Bench in the interest of equity and justice feel that the matter needs re-examination by the ld. CIT(E). Accordingly, the matter is restored to the file of the ld.CIT(E) to consider the above submissions of the assessee and allow the appeal of the assessee in accordance with law. The assessee is also directed to submit the necessary document before the ld. CIT(A) to settle the lis and the matter is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(E) to decide it afresh by providing one more opportunity of hearing. However, the assessee will not seek any adjournment on frivolous ground and remain cooperative during the course of proceedings. Thus the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 3.5 Before parting, we may make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by ld. CIT(E) independently in accordance with law.