SHUBHSITA FOUNDATION,THANE vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1283/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 September 2024Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)3 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal found that the cancellation of provisional registration and approval was consequential to the denial of regular registration and approval. Therefore, the appeals became infructuous.

What were the facts?

The appellant trust filed appeals against the denial of provisional registration under Section 12AB and provisional approval under Section 80G(5). The appeals were filed with a significant delay, which the tribunal condoned.

What were the issues?

Whether appeals against consequential orders of cancellation of provisional registration and approval are maintainable when the primary applications for regular registration/approval were denied.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 80G(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE

Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Poonia &, Shri Rajat Chaudhary
For Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Hearing: 23.09.2024Pronounced: 24.09.2024
1.

These two appeals filed by the appellant Trust are directed against the orders of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune both dated 20.11.2023 denying grant of provisional registration u/s.12AB and denying grant of provisional approval 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’).

2.

At the outset, we find the appeals are time barred by limitation by 193 days before the Tribunal. The appellant trust filed petitions praying for condonation of delay on the ground that the delay had occurred on account of wrong advice given by the Tax Consultant. We have gone through the averments made in the condonation petition and find that there is no material on record to disbelieve the explanation of the appellant and keeping in view the salutary principle governing the condonation of delay that the appellant does not gain anything in filing the appeal with delay, the delay deserves to be condoned. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that these are fit cases to condone the delay. We therefore condone the delay of 193 days in filing the appeals and admit the appeals, proceed for adjudication of appeals.

3.

We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The present appeals was filed being aggrieved by that part of the order passed u/s.12AB. We find the ld. CIT(Exemption) has cancelled the provisional registration granted earlier u/s.12AB. We are of the considered opinion that the cancellation of the provisional registration is only consequential to the denial of grant of regular registration. Similar is the position in respect of the appeal filed against non-grant of provisional approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act. Cancellation of the provisional approval is consequential to the refusal to grant of regular approval. Therefore, the appeals filed by the appellant trust become infructuous, accordingly, the appeals are dismissed as such.

4.

In the result, both the appeals filed by the appellant trust are partly allowed. Order pronounced on this 24th day of September, 2024.

More judgments on Section 12AB

All 5,972 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →