Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW
Before: SHRI. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA & SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY
This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 12.10.2017 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) [hereinafter called the ‘CIT(E)’], Lucknow, wherein, vide the impugned order, the ld. CIT(E) has rejected the assessee’s application for registration under section 12A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). 2. The following grounds have been raised by the assessee in this regard:
That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) has erred in law as well as on facts and circumstances of the case in refusing registration to the appellant trust under section 12A of the Income Tax Act 1961.
That the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) is without proper opportunity and bad in law.
That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) failed to appreciate the documents placed on record and also filed with the application u/s 12A and has concluded that activities have been carried out by the appellant are not genuine. 4. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) has failed to appreciate that the main objects of the appellant trust are charitable in nature and therefore all the more there is no justification in refusing to register the appellant under section 12A of the Income Tax Act. 5. That the various observations made by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) are on hypothesis surmises and in any view of the matter he is not justified in refusing the registration u/s 12A. 6. That the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) is against merits, circumstances and legal aspects of the case. 7. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw any or all the grounds of appeal on or before the date of hearing.
3. At the outset, the ld. AR submitted that the appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation by 428 days. He further submitted that the assessee has submitted an application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, supported by an affidavit, stating therein that the appeal could not be filed within the time stipulated for the reason that the assessee was unaware of the fact that the rejection order was appealable before the ITAT and that it was only after obtaining proper legal advice, that the assessee learnt about the same and subsequently the appeal was filed before the Tribunal. It was prayed that the delay caused in filing the appeal was not deliberate and was entirely beyond the control of the assessee and therefore, the same may be condoned and the appeal be heard on merits.
Per contra, the ld. CIT(DR) had no objection to the delay being condoned.
We have heard both the parties and have also perused the material available on record. From a perusal of application for condonation of delay, duly supported by an Affidavit, we are of the considered view that the reason for not filing the appeal within the stipulated time is genuine and the bonafides are beyond doubt. Therefore, we condone the delay of 428 days and admit the appeal for hearing.
The ld. authorized representative for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(E) had passed ex-parte order, rejecting the assessee’s application for registration. He submitted that the ld. CIT(E) had failed to appreciate the documents placed on record as well as filed along with the application for registration under section 12A of the Act and has wrongly concluded that the activities carried out by the assessee were not genuine. He prayed that the assessee be afforded another opportunity to present its case before the ld. CIT(E).
Per contra, the ld. CIT(D.R.) opposed the prayer of the assessee for being given another opportunity.
We have heard both the parties and after having gone through the material on record, we note that the ld. CIT (Exemption) has rejected the application of the assessee for registration under section 12A(1) of the Act on the ground that assessee had failed to provide sufficient material to corroborate the charitable nature of the objects as well as the genuineness of the activities. From the order of ld. CIT (Exemption), it is apparent that the ld. CIT (Exemption) had issued only one letter dated 15.09.2017 calling for specific information regarding its application for registration. No further opportunity was provided to the assessee in this regard. Under these facts, we feel that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to explain its case before the ld. CIT (Exemption), as the assessee has not been given proper and sufficient opportunity before disposing of the application of registration by the ld. CIT (Exemption). We, therefore, set aside the order of the ld. CIT (Exemption) and restore the matter to his file with the direction to consider the application of the assessee for registration under section 12A of the Act after giving proper and sufficient opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to comply with the notices and provide the material / clarification as required by the ld. CIT (Exemption).
In the final result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 30/09/2024.