Shri Sajjan Singh Shiksha Samiti, Rewa V. Commissioner of Income Tax (Examption), Bhopal

ITA 18/JAB/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5603 (ITAT-JABALPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-02-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 21-08-2020
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ANUPAM BERI
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 12A; 119(2)(b); 201; 119

Judgement Text

SHRI SAJJAN SINGH SHIKSHA SAMITI V. CIT (E) ITA NO. 18/JAB/2020 ( AY 2017 - 18 ) 1 | P A G E IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JABALPUR BENCH, JABALPUR BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.18 /JAB/20 20 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 201 7 - 1 8 SHRI SAJJAN SINGH SHIKSHA SAMITI, REWA [ PAN : AAIAS 9997H ] V S. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION S ) , BHOPAL (APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI ANUPAM BERI , CA RESPONDENT BY SMT. NEERAJA PRADHAN , CIT - DR DATE OF HEARING 0 5 /02 /202 1 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 05 /0 2/2021 ORDER P ER S ANJAY ARORA , AM: THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER U NDER S ECTION 119(2)(B) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT HEREINAFTER) READ WITH RULE 12(2) AND THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 (THE RULES HEREINAFTER) BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), BHOPAL (CIT( E ) FOR SHORT) DATED 08.7.2020. 2. THE FACTS OF THE CASE , TO THE EXTENT RELEVANT , ARE THAT THE A SSESSEE, A SOCIETY REGISTERED U NDER S ECTION 12A OF THE ACT, FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE RELEVANT A SSESSMENT Y EAR , I.E. , AY 2017 - 18, ON 14.12.2017, ALSO FIL ING ALONG WITH THE A UDIT R EPORT IN FORM - 10B. THE DUE DATE OF FILING THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE SAID YEAR BEING 07.11.2017 (EXTENDED FROM 30/9/2017) , THE SAME WAS ADMITTEDLY F URNISHED BELATEDLY. THE ASSESSEE BEING UNABLE TO FURNISH ANY GENUINE REASON FOR THE SAID DELAY, ITS APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY WAS REJECTED BY THE L D . CIT( E ). AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSE E IS IN APPEAL. SHRI SAJJAN SINGH SHIKSHA SAMITI V. CIT (E) ITA NO. 18/JAB/2020 ( AY 2017 - 18 ) 2 | P A G E 2. BEFORE US , WHILE THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, SHRI BERI, WAS UNABLE TO STATE ANY REASON FOR THE DELAY, HE WOULD SUBMIT THAT THE AUDIT REPORT (IN FORM 10B) HAD BEEN DULY OBTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE IN TIME , I.E. , ON 15.5.2017. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEES RETURN FOR THE SAID YEAR WAS NOT TAKEN UP FOR SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT. NO PREJUDICE AS SUCH STANDS CAUSED TO THE R EVENUE BY THE DELAY ED FILING OF THE RETURN, WHICH HAS IN FACT BEEN ACCEPTED AT THE RETURNED INCOME OF N IL. THE LD. CIT - DR, MS. PRADHAN, WOULD, ON THE OTHER HAND, SUBMIT THAT THE AUDIT REPORT HAS TO BE BOTH OBTAINED AND FURNISHED BY THE DUE DATE OF FILING THE RETURN, AND ITS SUBSEQUENT FILING WOULD BE OF LITTLE CONSEQUENCE INASMUCH AS THE BREACH OF THE RELEV ANT PROVISION GETS OCCURRED ON THE NON - FILING THEREOF IN TIME , SO THAT THE ONLY QUESTION THAT SURVIVES IS THE EXISTENCE OF A REASONABLE AND BONA FIDE CAUSE FOR THE DELAY, WHICH REMAINS UNEXPLAINED . IN FACT, THE REPORT HAVING BEEN OBTAINED ON 15.5.2017 , THE RE OUGHT TO BE STRONG REASONS FOR ITS NON - FILING EVEN BY 07.11.2017 , WHILE NONE HAS BEEN STATED . 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. AT THE OUTSET, WE ARE UNABLE TO FATHOM , AND NEITHER WAS THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL ABLE TO EXP LAIN US AS TO HOW AN APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER LIES BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, WHOSE JURISDICTION EXTENDS TO ORDERS AS WELL AS THE MATTERS SPECIFIED IN SECTION 253 OF THE ACT, AND WHICH BEARS NO REFERENCE TO AN ORDER UNDER SECTION 119(2)(B) OF THE ACT. T HE SAME IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER, AGAINST WHICH, W H E RE AG GRIEVED, RE COURSE WOULD LIE ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE SIDE . I N THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE , AS WE OBSERVE, THE ASSESSEE IS NOT AG GRIEVED INASMUCH AS THE RETURN HAS BEEN ACCEPTED AT THE RETURNED INCOME (OF N IL) AND , FURTHER, NO T SUBJECT TO THE VERIFICATION PROCEEDING S UNDER THE ACT. THIS MAY PERHAPS BE ON ACCOUNT OF THE APPLICABILITY OF CIRCULAR 10 OF 2019 NO T ON RECORD, STATED TO PROVIDE FOR AN AUTOMATIC CONDONATION IN RESPECT OF AYS. 2016 - 17 AND 2017 - 18. THE OCCASION TO PLEAD SO WOULD ARISE ONLY WHERE SOME GRIEVANCE IS CAUSED TO THE ASSESSE DUE TO THE IMPUGNED ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER, WHICH IS TO BE, IN THAT CASE, PURSUED ON THE SHRI SAJJAN SINGH SHIKSHA SAMITI V. CIT (E) ITA NO. 18/JAB/2020 ( AY 2017 - 18 ) 3 | P A G E ADMINISTRAT IVE SIDE. WE HAVE CLARIFIED THIS ONLY AS A MATTER OF ABUNDANT CAUTION; THE TRIBUNAL, AS STATED, HAVING NO LOCUS STANDI IN THE MATTER. IT IS RATHER UNFORTUNATE THAT NEITHER SIDE BROUGHT TH E FACT OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEING U/S. 119 TO OUR NOTICE, WHICH CAM E TO LIGHT ONLY AT THE TIME OF DICTATING THE ORDER AFTER BEING HEARD ON 02/2/2020, NECESSITATING REPOSTING THE APPEAL FOR HEARING AGAIN ON 05/2/2020 TO CLARIFY THIS ASPECT AS WELL AS HEAR THE PARTIES THEREON. NEEDLESS TO ADD, NO EXPLANATION FOR FILING OF T HE APPEAL COULD BE FURNISHED BY SH. BERI ON THE BENCH OBSERVING THE IMPUGNED ORDER AS BEING NOT AN APPEALABLE ORDER. WE DECIDE ACCORDINGLY. 4 . IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED AS NOT MAINTAINABLE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON FEBRUARY 05, 2020 SD/ - SD/ - (N.R.S.GANESAN) (SANJAY ARORA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 05 / 02 /202 1 / / T R U E C O P Y / /