K.C.A. CHARITABLE TRUST,KOLKATA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), KOLKATA

The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption), Kolkata [in short ld. ‘CIT(Exemption)’] in relation to registration applied u/s 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in brevity the ‘Act’) dated 17.04.2023.

Ld. Counsel for the assessee before entering into the merit of the appeal has submitted with regard to his condonation petition as appeal had been filed after a delay of 242 days. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the delay as alleged to be caused was under honest and bona fide belief as the assessee has availed the forum of ld. CIT (Exemption) thrice once after I.T.A. No.: 285/ KOL/2024 Assessment Year: N.A. K.C.A. Charitable Trust. another for remedy as it was in the impression of the assessee that the relief shall be granted by ld. CIT (Exemption) and roughly when the application has been rejected on 20.11.2023 then on the advice of the Sr. tax advisor the assessee has filed the present appeal before the ITAT. The submission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee is that delay which is alleged to be caused was not intentional rather due to the honest and bona fide belief. Hence, prayed to admit the appeal by condoning the delay. He has cited a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of N. Balakrishnan vs. M. Krishnamurthy reported in [1998] 7 SCC 123. 2.1. The ld. D/R did not raise much emphasis on the condonation petition of the assessee. 2.2. We have perused the application of the condonation petition and it appears to us that the assessee has filed an application u/s 80G of the Act which was rejected. The assessee again re-applied for the registration u/s 80G(5) of the Act which was also rejected. Ultimately this appeal has been filed. It is settled law by the Hon'ble Apex Court that the primary function of the Court is to adjudicate the dispute between the parties and to advance substantial justice. The expression ‘sufficient cause’ employed by the Legislature is adequately elastic to enable the Court to apply the law in a meaningful manner which subserves the ends of justice. The Hon'ble Apex Court in a catena of decisions has further held that ‘The Court should not adopt an injustice-oriented approach in rejecting the application of condonation of delay.’ 2.3. Keeping in view the principles of the law as well as facts enumerated by the assessee in his condonation petition, the petition u/s 5 of the Limitation Act is allowed, delay is condoned and the appeal is taken for hearing. 3. Ld. Counsel for the assessee challenged the impugned order of ld. CIT (Exemption) thereby submitting that ld. CIT (Exemption) has erred in rejecting the application of the assessee on the ground being wrong selection of the Section code. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that it was not in dispute that the assessee is a charitable Trust and provisional approval was granted Page 2 of 5 I.T.A. No.: 285/ KOL/2024 Assessment Year: N.A. K.C.A. Charitable Trust. under u/s 80G(5)(iv) of the Act on 31.12.2021 with effect from 31.12.2021 to AY 2024-25 in Form 10AC. It has further been submitted that income tax portal allowed the assessee to re-apply for the registration u/s 80G of the Act and the assessee filed an application on 25.10.2022 which was rejected vide order dated 17.04.2023 as this was made under an incorrect Section code. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submits that the first application made by the assessee dated 31.03.2022 was u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the Act. However, in the rejection order, ld. CIT (Exemption) rejected it by referring to Clause (ii) of the second proviso to Section 80G(5) of the Act, this caused the confusion in the assessee’s mind and due to this there was incorrect selection of the sub- clause. The prayer of the assessee is to direct the CIT to treat his application u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the Act to reconsider the same. Ld. Counsel for the assessee has cited the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Friends of Kolkata vs. CIT (Exemption), (ITAT, Kolkata).