DASHASHRIMALI RADHANPURA JAIN GYATI,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 869/AHD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 June 2024Bench: MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member)5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, finding sufficient cause. It set aside the CIT(E)'s order and remanded the matter for a fresh decision on merits, allowing the assessee an opportunity to present its case.

What were the facts?

The assessee-trust applied for registration under Section 12AB. The CIT(E) rejected the application ex-parte due to non-response to notices. The assessee claimed they did not receive notices due to technical errors.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and if the matter should be remanded back to the CIT(E) for a fresh decision on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “ B ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE & SHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, Adv
Hearing: 19/06/2024Pronounced: 25/06/2024

] ] BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER Assessment Year : - Dashashrimali Radhanpura Jain The CIT (Exemption) Gyati, Vs Ahmedabad Radhanpuri Bazar, Nanbha Street, Bhavnagar – 364 001 (Gujarat) PAN: अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Mehul K. Patel, Adv. Revenue by : Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 19/06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement: 25/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R

PER SHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, AM:

1.

This appeal by the Assessee-trust is directed against the order of the Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmadabad [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld.CIT(E)”], dated 18-09-2023, whereby the application for registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”], was rejected.

2.

The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

“(1) That on facts, and in law, the learned CIT (Exemptions) Ahmedabad has grievously erred in not granting sufficient opportunity to the appellant, and Dashashrimali Radhanpura Jain Gyoti vs. CIT(E)

2 reasonable as no notices were received by appellant on email/ WhatsApp, and in deciding the application u/s 12AB ex- parte.

(2) That on facts, and in law, CIT (Exemptions), Ahmedabad erred in the learned has grievously rejecting the application for registration u/s.12AB of the Act by ex-parte order.

(3) The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend any ground of appeal.”

Facts of the case:

3.

The assessee-trust had filed an application in Form 10AB on 27-03-2023 for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act. The Ld.CIT(E) granted the registration up to Assessment Year (AY) 2023-24 vide order dated 27-05-2021 in Form 10AC. The Ld.CIT(E) issued several notices to the assessee trust regarding this application. However, the assessee failed to respond to these notices. Consequently, the Ld.CIT(E) disposed of the application based on the material available on record, concluding that the trust failed to satisfy the genuineness of its activities and its objects as required under the Act.

On the Grounds of appeal:

4.

The assessee-trust has explained the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. It was submitted in the Affidavit dated 23-04-2004 of the Assessee’s Trustee Shri Jitendra Shantilal Sheth, which reads as under:

“I, JITENDRA SHANTILAL SHETH, aged about 77 years, being Trustee of Dashashrimali Radhanpura Jain Gyati and residing at 402.KALPASUTRA APPARTMENT, KALUBHA ROAD, TAKHTESHWAR, BHAVNAGAR, GUJARAT-364002, do hereby state on oath and solemn affirmation as under: Dashashrimali Radhanpura Jain Gyoti vs. CIT(E)

The appeal is being filed before Hon'ble ITAT against the order of CIT (Exemption), Ahmedabad dated 18/09/2023 passed u/s 12AB of the IT Act, and the bona fide reasons for delay in filing the appeal are due to the following circumstances:

1) The appellant Trust has been granted Provisional registration certificate in form no 10AC for AY 2021-22 to AY 2023-24 provisionally on 27-05- 2021. 2) Before completion of the Assessment year 2023-24 i.e., on 27th March, 2023, the appellant Trust has filed renewal application under form no 10AB.

3) In month of October, 2023, it was seen on IT Portal in the relevant column that our application for permanent registration was rejected. However, no document/ order was seen on the IT Portal except letter for NOC from the ITO (Tech)-1, Pr. CIT-1, Ahmedabad dated 29.09.2023 for transferring PAN from Bhavnagar to CIT(exemption), Ahmedabad.

4) Hence, it was only seen that our application for renewal was rejected. However, no order or intimation was seen on IT Portal as well as no communication was received for rejecting the application for renewal.

5) Thereupon, we have once again file an application in form no 10AB on 17th November, 2023. 6) Thereafter, we received a notice of hearing dated 18.03.2024, and that time for the first time, we have seen the order for rejection of our renewal application on the IT Portal as well as all related e-proceeding notices issued for details to be submitted. Before above, we have not seen/application on the IT Portal as well as all related e-proceeding notices issued for details to be submitted. Before above, we have not seen/ received any notice in e proceeding tab. This may be due to technical error on the site/portal.

7) Hence, since we have now received the order, we are filing this appeal before Hon'ble ITAT.

Hence, the delay has occurred due to this bonafide reason and unavoidable circumstances, and in the interest of justice, the delay in filing this appeal, may kindly be condoned, and appeal may kindly be decided on merits, and oblige. For, Dashashrimali Radhanpura Jain Gyati”

4.1. The Ld.AR submitted that under the above circumstances led to the trustee being unaware of the rejection order issued by the Ld.CIT(E). Dashashrimali Radhanpura Jain Gyoti vs. CIT(E)

5.

The Ld. Departmental Representative stated that since the Ld.CIT(E) has not decided the matter on merits, it will be apt to refer the matter back to Ld.CIT(E).

6.

We have heard the learned representatives of both parties and perused the material on record. The primary issue for our consideration is whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the matter should be remanded back to the Ld.CIT(E) for a fresh decision on merits.

6.1. Considering the submissions and the circumstances detailed by the assessee-trust, we find that there exists sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Ors. [(1987) 2 SCC 107] emphasized that a liberal approach should be adopted in condoning delays to advance substantial justice. Following this principle, we are inclined to condone the delay in filing the appeal.

6.2. On the merits of the case, it appears that the Ld.CIT(E) has not had the benefit of a full and comprehensive response from the assessee-trust due to the reasons mentioned. In the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it appropriate to set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(E) and remand the matter back to the file of the Ld.CIT(E) for a fresh adjudication. The assessee-trust is directed to adhere to the timelines set by the Ld.CIT(E) and to fully co- operate in the proceedings. Dashashrimali Radhanpura Jain Gyoti vs. CIT(E)

6.3. In view of the above, we hereby: i. Condone the delay in filing the appeal by the assessee-trust. ii. Set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(E) dated 18/09/2023 and remand the matter back to the file of Ld.CIT(E) for a fresh decision on merits, after giving the assessee an opportunity to present its case.

6.4. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee-trust is allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 12AB

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →