M/S PEOPLE UNIVERSITY,BHOPAL vs. CIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRIB.M. BIYANI
आदेश/O R D E R
Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 7th March, 2023, of Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption) passed u/s 10(23C)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. There is a delay of 129 days in filing the present appeal. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay alongwith the affidavit of Counsel of the assessee. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the impugned order was communicated to Page 1 of 11
M/s. People University, Bhopal vs. CIT (Exemption), Bhopal ITA No.345/Ind/2023 Assessment year 2017-18 the assessee through e-mail and which was forwarded to Shri Gagan Tiwari,
Advocate, the counsel of the assessee, on 4th June, 2023. A copy of the e-
mail message is filed alongwith the application. The Ld. Senior Counsel has
further submitted that due to the summer vacation of the Hon'ble High
Court, the counsel was not immediately able to take a print out of the said
order received in e-mail and thereafter on resumption of the regular working
days, the order was down loaded and print out is taken. However, due to
inadvertent and bona fide mistake, the said order was mis-placed causing
the delay in filing the present appeal. Thus, there is a lapse on the part of
the counsel of the assessee, which has caused the delay in filing the present
appeal. The Ld. Senior Counsel has pleaded that delay in filing the present
appeal is neither intentional nor deliberate, but due to the circumstances,
which were beyond the control of the assessee and, therefore, the delay may
be condoned and the appeal of the assessee be adjudicated on merit.
On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative has
vehemently objected to the condonation of delay and submitted that the
assessee has not explained sufficient cause for delay of more than 4 months
and shifting the blame on the counsel of the assessee.
We have considered the rival contention as well as the contents of the
application for condonation of delay and affidavit of the advocate of the
assessee. Shri Gagan Tiwari, Advocate, stated in the affidavit that the
reasons explained in the application are true and correct as due to
inadvertent and lapse on his part, the appeal could not be filed within the
Page 2 of 11
M/s. People University, Bhopal vs. CIT (Exemption), Bhopal ITA No.345/Ind/2023 Assessment year 2017-18 period of limitation. The assessee has explained the events and reasons
causing the delay of 129 days alongwith relevant record of e-mail sent to the
counsel, much before the appeal was filed. Therefore, in the facts and
circumstances of the case, when the delay is caused due to inadvertent and
bona fide mistake on the part of the counsel of the assessee, we are satisfied
that the assessee was having sufficient reason for not filing the present
appeal within the period of limitation. Accordingly, in view of the judgement
of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Collector Land Acquisition vs.
MST. Katiji & Others, 167 ITR 471, the delay in filing the present appeal is
condoned.
The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal :-
Page 3 of 11
M/s. People University, Bhopal vs. CIT (Exemption), Bhopal ITA No.345/Ind/2023 Assessment year 2017-18
Page 4 of 11
M/s. People University, Bhopal vs. CIT (Exemption), Bhopal ITA No.345/Ind/2023 Assessment year 2017-18
Page 5 of 11
M/s. People University, Bhopal vs. CIT (Exemption), Bhopal ITA No.345/Ind/2023 Assessment year 2017-18
Page 6 of 11
M/s. People University, Bhopal vs. CIT (Exemption), Bhopal ITA No.345/Ind/2023 Assessment year 2017-18
The assessee university was incorporated on 4th May, 2011, as per
Madhya Pradesh Niji Vishwavidyalay (Sthapna Aavam Sanchalan)
Adhiniyam, 2007. The assessee University also approved u/s 2(f) of the
UGC Act, 1956. The assessee had earlier filed applications in Form No.
10AB for registration/approval u/s 10(23C)(vi) for the years 2012-13 and
2013-14, which were rejected by CIT(E) vide orders dated. 31.03.2014 and
31.03.2015 respectively. The Ld. Counsel submitted that the assessee has
challenged the earlier order dated 31st March, 2014, and 31st March, 2015,
in the Writ Petition 12193 of 2015 before Hon'ble High Court of Madhya
Pradesh at Jabalpur. The Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 27th July,
2016, set-aside the matter to the record of the CIT (Exemption) for re-
consideration. He has pointed out that while passing the impugned order,
the CIT(E) has referred to earlier rejected orders. Thus, the Ld. Counsel has
urged that when the earlier orders have been set-aside by the Hon'ble High
Court for re-consideration, it will be appropriate to set-aside this matter to
the record of the CIT(Exemption) for re-consideration as per the outcome of
the earlier set-aside proceedings.
On the other hand, the Ld. CIT Departmental Representative relied
upon the impugned order of the CIT (Exemption) and submitted that the
Ld. Commissioner has pointed out various irregularities and non-
compliances and, therefore, the assessee is not found eligible for approval
u/s 10(23C)(vi) of the Act. She has relied upon the impugned order of the
CIT (Exemption).
Page 7 of 11
M/s. People University, Bhopal vs. CIT (Exemption), Bhopal ITA No.345/Ind/2023 Assessment year 2017-18 7. We have considered the rival submissions as well as material on
record. The application of the assessee for approval u/s 10(23C)(vi) has
been rejected vide impugned order due to various discrepancies noted by
the CIT (Exemption) as the same were already taken in to consideration
while passing the earlier orders dated 31st March, 2014, and 31st March,
2015. The CIT (Exemption) has specifically asked the assessee about the
status of the earlier application rejected vide order dated 31st March, 2014,
and 31st March, 2015, and to provide complete details of all cases in any
Court decided or pending relating to the earlier order, but while passing the
impugned order, the CIT (Exemption) has not taken into consideration the
order of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court dated 27.07.2016. Further,
we note that at page nos. 7 & 8 of the impugned order, the CIT (Exemption)
has remarked that the application of the assessee was earlier rejected on
various grounds and one of the grounds as per earlier rejection order is
same as given in the present order. The CIT (Exemption) has also noted
that at the time of earlier rejection order, various discrepancies were found
and it was held that the University is not existed solely for the purpose of
education. Thus, it is clear that the impugned order passed by the Ld.
CIT(E) is on the similar line as the earlier order dated 31st March, 2014,
and 31st March, 2015, which were set-aside by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional
High Court for re-consideration by the CIT(Exemption) vide order dated
27.07.2016, as under :-
Page 8 of 11
M/s. People University, Bhopal vs. CIT (Exemption), Bhopal ITA No.345/Ind/2023 Assessment year 2017-18 “ That apart, in para 25 also certain analyses have been
made with observations regarding right of an assessee to be
considered. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in this case has
remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for
reconsideration, keeping in view the same we deem it appropriate
to remand the matter back to the Principal Chief Commissioner
Income Tax, Aaykar Bhawan, Hoshangabad Road, Bhopal , for
reconsideration, accordingly, on the assessee filing a certified
copy of this order along with a copy of the order passed in the
case of Queen’s Educational Society (supra). The Chief
Commissioner shall take note of the principle laid down by the
Supreme Court as indicated hereinabove and after considering
the provisions of sub section 1(iii) of Section 10(23C) and the
proviso thereto shall take a decision in the matter.
We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion
on the merits of the claim and it is exclusively for the Chief
Commissioner to take a decision in the matter. ”
Accordingly, in view of the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High
Court, the impugned order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption)
is set-aside and the matter is remanded to the record of the CIT(Exemption)
for consideration of the same in the light of the order of the Hon'ble
Page 9 of 11
M/s. People University, Bhopal vs. CIT (Exemption), Bhopal ITA No.345/Ind/2023 Assessment year 2017-18 Jurisdictional High Court. Needless to, say that the assessee be given an
appropriate opportunity of hearing before passing the fresh order. 9. Resultantly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical
purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 15.02.2024.
Sd/- Sd/- (B.M. BIYANI) (VIJAY PAL RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Indore िदनांक/Dated :15.02.2024. CPU/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPY Assistant Registrar
Page 10 of 11
M/s. People University, Bhopal vs. CIT (Exemption), Bhopal ITA No.345/Ind/2023 Assessment year 2017-18 Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore
Page 11 of 11