M/S MANDSAUR SEWA BHARTI SAMITI ,MANDSAUR vs. THE 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 B.M. Biyani, A.M.:
Feeling aggrieved by order dated 24.08.2022passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Exemption), Bhopal [“Ld. CIT(E)”] by which the assessee’s application in Form No. 10AB dated 28.03.2022 for grant of final registration u/s 12AA of Income-tax Act, 1961 has been rejected, the assessee has filed this appeal on the grounds mentioned in Appeal Memo.
Heard the learned Representatives of both sides at length and case- records perused.
Page 1 of 4
Mandsaur Sewa Bharti Samiti, Mandsaur ITA No.72/Ind/2023 3. The Registry has informed that the present appeal is filed after a delay
of 135 days and, therefore, time barred. The Ld. AR submitted that the
assessee is a society engaged in charitable objects for the welfare of public.
The assessee has filed an application seeking condonation of delay
supported by an affidavit duly stamped and notarized. Drawing our
attention to the said affidavit, the Ld. AR submitted that there was a change
in the Chairman of the Society and the impugned order was actually served
by the Department on the e-mail address of past Chairman given at the time
of filing of application. Thereafter, the impugned order dated 24.08.2022
passed by CIT(E)by which the assessee’s application was rejected, was not
served physically; it was served only on e-mail address of past Chairman.
Subsequently, after lapse of time when the Income-tax counsel of assessee
enquired from assessee about the status of registration, the assessee in turn
enquired from past Chairman and then only the assessee came to know
about its application having been rejected by CIT(E). Immediately thereafter,
the assessee brought it to the notice of Income-tax counsel who guided for
filing of appeal before the ITAT. Ultimately, the appeal could be filed before
ITAT on 07.03.2023. Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is a charitable
institution being managed by Chairman who also changes from time to time
and therefore the delay in filing of appeal is purely because of change in
Chairman; there is no deliberate attempt or malafide intention on the part of
assessee. Ld. AR submitted that the assessee’s case is meritorious and the
grant of registration is very essential for availing exemption under income-
tax which would in turn enable the assessee to carry on its charitable
Page 2 of 4
Mandsaur Sewa Bharti Samiti, Mandsaur ITA No.72/Ind/2023 activities smoothly for the welfare of public at large. Therefore, the delay of
135 days should be condonedby taking a judicious view. We confronted Ld.
DR who did not show any objection. Taking a judicious view, we condone
the delay and admit this appeal; accordingly proceed to dispose of by this
order.
On the merits of case, Ld. AR drew our attention to the impugned
order dated 24.08.2022 passed by CIT(E) and submitted that vide notice
dated 03.08.2022, the CIT(E) fixed the assessee’s registration application for
hearing on 16.08.2022. On 16.08.2022, the assessee filed an application
requesting for grant of adjournment upto 31.08.2022, a copy of the
acknowledgment downloaded from ITBA Portal of Income-tax Department is
filed at Page No. 22 of Paper-Book. However, the Ld. CIT(E) did not take
cognizance of assessee’s request and passed impugned order on 24.08.2022
rejecting the registration. Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) was not justified
in passing order on 24.08.2022 ignoring/not considering the adjournment
request filed by assessee. Therefore, the order of CIT(E) must be quashed
and the case should be remanded back to him for a fresh adjudication.
Ld. DR dutifully supported the impugned order but, however, could
not contradict the submission of Ld. AR.
After careful consideration, we find that the Ld.CIT(E) has passed
impugned order on 24.08.2022 despite the existence of assessee’s
adjournment request uptill31.08.2022 on ITBA Portal. Further, it is also not
a case of department that the CIT(E) denied the adjournment sought by
Page 3 of 4
Mandsaur Sewa Bharti Samiti, Mandsaur ITA No.72/Ind/2023 assessee. Therefore, it is a case where the CIT(E) has passed order which is patently wrong and illegal. In this circumstance, we are inclined to accept the prayer of assesseeto quash the impugned order and remand this case back to Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. We order accordingly. We also direct the assessee to participate in the proceeding and do not seek unnecessary adjournments.
Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 01/06/2023.
Sd/- sd/- (VIJAY PAL RAO) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Indore �दनांक /Dated : 01.06.2023 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 Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore
Page 4 of 4
