DEVELOPMENT OF EDUCATION AND ENVIRONMENT TRUST,MADURAI vs. CIT, MADURAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's order dismissing the application as withdrawn, finding that the trustees had agreed to withdrawal. Regarding retrospective registration, the Tribunal held that the Commissioner lacked the power to condone delay or grant registration retrospectively for applications filed after June 1, 2007.
What were the facts?
The assessee trust filed applications for registration under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act. In one case, the application was dismissed as withdrawn, though the assessee claimed no authorization was given. In another, the assessee sought retrospective registration to cover past tax liabilities.
What were the issues?
Whether the Commissioner was justified in dismissing the application as withdrawn, and whether retrospective registration could be granted for an application filed beyond the prescribed time limit.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 12AA,Section 12A(1)(a)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Both the appeals of the assessee are directed against the respective order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chennai and the Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Chennai. Let us first take of 2015.
Shri T. Vasudevan, the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the CIT (Exemptions) dismissed the application on the ground that one Shri V. Francis, the authorized representative of the assessee withdrew the application filed for registration under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). The Ld. counsel clarified that the assessee never authorized anybody either to appear before the CIT (Exemptions) or to withdraw the application filed. The assessee has also filed an affidavit to that effect before this Tribunal. On the basis of the affidavit filed by the assessee, this Tribunal called for the records of the CIT (Exemptions). When the appeal was taken up for hearing, Shri G.M. Das, the Ld. Departmental Representative produced the original file for verification. In the original file, it is clearly stated that the Managing Trustee Ms. B. Premalatha and another trustee appeared before the Commissioner and they agreed for withdrawal of the application. Both of them signed the orders sheet entry. After verification, the original file of the CIT (Exemptions) was returned back to the Ld. D.R., Shri G.M. Das.
On a query from the bench, how the assessee goes on filing application after application under Section 12AA of the Act, for registration without prosecuting the original application filed by the assessee, the Ld. counsel very fairly submitted that this is the second application filed by the assessee which is not maintainable. An application was initially filed in the year 1993 and the result of the same is not known to the assessee. Therefore, a second application was filed on 27.09.2013. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai granted registration w.e.f. 01.04.2013. The Ld. counsel submitted that a direction may be given to the Commissioner to pass order on the application filed in the year 1993.
On the contrary, Shri G.M. Das, the Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that on the basis of the application filed by the assessee on 27.09.2013, the CIT-1, Madurai granted registration w.e.f.
01.04.2013 by an order dated 26.03.2014. The present appeal is against the order passed by the Commissioner on the second application filed for registration. According to the Ld. D.R., successive application cannot be filed since the registration was already granted.
Therefore this application is not maintainable.
We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the material available on record. Admittedly, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) dismissed the application of the assessee on the ground that the same was withdrawn by the assessee’s representative Shri V. Francis. Now, it is demonstrated before this Tribunal that the assessee in fact engaged nobody to represent before the Commissioner. In fact the Managing Trustee and the another trustee appeared before the Commissioner and they agreed for withdrawal of the application since the reasons for withdrawal of the second application filed by the assessee is not maintainable before the Commissioner. Therefore, the Commissioner has rightly rejected the application filed by the assessee. This Tribunal do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the Commissioner.
Now coming to of 2015, Shri T. Vasudevan, the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the application was filed for registration on 27.09.2013 and the registration was in fact granted w.e.f., 01.04.2013. According to the Ld. counsel, there was a huge tax liability for the assessment year 2009-10 and 2010-11. Unless the registration was granted retrospectively, the assessee has to pay huge liability.
Therefore, the registration may be granted retrospectively. On a query from the bench, whether there is any power for the Commissioner to condone the delay in filing the application for registration under Section 12AA of the Act and grant registration with retrospective operation, the Ld. counsel submitted that the Commissioner has no such power to condone the delay in filing the application. The Ld. counsel explained that there is a real difficulty for the assessee in meeting the liability.
Therefore, to meet the ends of justice registration may be granted with retrospective operation.
We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the material available on record. Admittedly, the assessee filed the application on 27.09.2013, even though the assessee’s trust was established by a trust deed on 20.09.1993. Section 12A(1)(a) of the Act clearly says that the assessee has to file the application for registration before the expiry of a period of one year from the date of creation of the trust or the establishment of the institution. The Commissioner was empowered to grant registration even though the application was filed beyond the period of one year with effect from the date of its establishment provided the Commissioner satisfied that the person in receipt of the income was prevented from making the application before the expiry of the period of one year for sufficient reasons. However, such power was not available in respect of the application made on or after first day of June 2007 which is obvious from the second proviso to Section 12(1)(a) of the Act. In this case, the application was filed on 27.09.2013. Therefore, at the best, the CIT(Exemptions) could grant registration under Section 12AA of the Act from the first day of the financial year in which the application was filed. It is not in dispute that registration was granted from 01.04.2013, as per the existing provisions of law. Since, the application was filed after 1st of June 2007, the Commissioner of Exemption has no power to condone the delay or grant registration from the date of its establishment. Therefore, this Tribunal do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the lower authority.
The assessee also claims that an application was filed for registration under Section 12AA of the Act, in the year 1993. However, no material is available on record to substantiate this claim. It is made clear that in case such an application was filed either in the year 1993 or in any of the earlier years it is open to the assessee to take such steps as it may necessary in accordance with law for disposal of that application.
With the above observation, both the appeals of the assessee stands dismissed.
Order pronounced on 28th February, 2017 at Chennai.
More judgments on Section 12AA
- Yashaswi Academy for Skills, Pune vs PCIT (Central), PuneITA 2448/PUN/2026[NA]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026
- Yashaswi Academy for Skills, Pune vs PCIT (Central), PuneITA 2447/PUN/2026[NA]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026
- Sri Jawahar Education Trust, Chamarajanagar vs The Income Tax Officer Ward 1…ITA 1735/BANG/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed5 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Punjab Urban Planning and Development… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(1), MohaliITA 636/CHANDI/2024[2021-22]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Punjab Urban Planning and Development… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle…ITA 635/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Laxman Singh Yadav vs. Bank Of BarodaMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Surendra Singh Rathore vs. Idfc First Bank Through Branch ManagerMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026