M/s. Annai Santhiya Educational Health and Charitable Trust, Trichy V. ACIT, Trichy

ITA 1339/CHNY/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 61151 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-05-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 30-05-2012
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 21-08-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K E B RENGARAJAN JUNIOR
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Condonation of delay
• Section: 12AA; 12; 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1339/MDS/2009 M/S ANNAI SANTHIYA EDUCATIONAL HEALTH AND CHARITABLE TRUST, NO.72, NAWAB THOTTAM, WORIYUR, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI 620 003. PAN : AABTA7972Q (APPELLANT) V. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE II, TIRUCHIRAPALLI. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K.E.B. RENGARAJAN, JUNIOR STANDING COUNSEL DATE OF HEARING : 30.05.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30.05.2012 O R D E R PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : IN THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, ITS GRIEVANC E IS THAT THE CIT, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI, WHILE GRANTING IT REGISTRATION UND ER SECTION 12AA OF INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'), DID NOT CONDONE THE DELAY, BUT, GRANTED SUCH A REGISTRATION ONLY FROM 1.4.2007. 2. THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED WITH A DELAY OF 582 D AYS. ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN AFFIDAVIT FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. I T IS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT ASSESSEE WAS RUNNING AN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION AND THEREFORE, WAS ALL ALON G UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT IT WAS COVERED BY EXEMPTIONS PROVIDED UNDER SE CTION 10(22)/ 2 I.T.A. NO. 1339/MDS/09 10(23C) OF THE ACT. HOWEVER, LATER ASSESSEE CAME T O KNOW THAT SUCH AN EXEMPTION MIGHT NOT BE AVAILABLE TO IT, UNLESS IT S ATISFIED CERTAIN CONDITIONS. THEREFORE, AS AN ABUNDANT PRECAUTION, IT HAD FILED AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT AND THIS CAUSED THE DELAY. 3. LEARNED D.R. DID NOT RAISE ANY SERIOUS OBJECTION . 4. WE FIND THAT THE CAUSE SHOWN TO BE REASONABLE AN D DELAY IS CONDONED AND APPEAL IS ADMITTED. 5. LEARNED A.R. IN SUPPORT OF THE APPEAL, SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE HAD CLEARLY MENTIONED BEFORE THE CIT ALSO THE REASO N FOR DELAY IN FILING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION. BUT, CIT BY HIS CRYPTIC ORDER HAS GIVEN FINDING THAT NO SUFFICIENT CAUSE WAS SHOWN. THIS W AS, ACCORDING TO LEARNED A.R., UNFAIR AND NOT JUSTIFIED. 6. PER CONTRA, LEARNED D.R. SUBMITTED THAT NO REASO NABLE CAUSE WAS SHOWN FOR THE DELAY, BEFORE THE CIT AND HE HAD NOT CONDONED THE DELAY, BUT GRANTED REGISTRATION WITH EFFECT FROM 1.4.2007. 7. WE HAVE PERUSED THE ORDER CIT AND HEARD THE RIV AL SUBMISSIONS. NO DOUBT, ASSESSEE HAD FILED ITS APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT WITH A DELAY OF TWELVE YEARS AND FOUR MONTHS, B EFORE THE CIT. NEVERTHELESS, ASSESSEE IN ITS FORWARDING LETTER TO SUCH APPLICATION HAD SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED THAT IT WAS DOING ONLY EDUCA TIONAL ACTIVITY AND WAS 3 I.T.A. NO. 1339/MDS/09 UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT IT WAS ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMP TION UNDER THE ACT. IT HAD ALSO PRAYED FOR CONDONATION OF THE DELAY. HOWE VER, CIT HAD NOT CONDONED THE DELAY. THE ONLY REASON CITED BY THE C IT WAS THAT SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR THE DELAY WAS NOT SHOWN. HOWE VER, IN OUR OPINION, THE CIT OUGHT HAVE CONSIDERED THE REQUEST OF THE AS SESSEE OBJECTIVELY SINCE REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT IS A MANDATORY REQUIREMENT FOR THE ASSESSEE FOR ENJOYING EXEMPTION UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE ACT. WE ARE, THEREFORE, OF THE OPINI ON THAT THE CIT HAS TO HAVE A FRESH LOOK ON THE APPLICATION FOR CONDONATIO N. WE, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT SO FAR AS NON-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION IS CONCERNED AND REMIT THE ISSUE BACK TO HIM FOR CONSIDERATION AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON WEDNESDAY, THE 30 TH OF MAY, 2012, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 30 TH MAY, 2012. KRI. COPY TO: APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT-I, TIRUCHIRAPPAL LI/ D.R./GUARD FILE