Srimath Pambhan Swamigal Medical and Charitable Trust, Ramanathapuram V. CIT, Madurai

ITA 1945/CHNY/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4526 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-07-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 01-07-2010
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 29-12-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B SRINIVAS
• Assessee Lawyers: N DEVANATHAN
• Keywords: Charitable institution

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHENNAI BENCH C BEFORE SHRI PRADEEP PARIKH, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO.1945/MDS/2009 SRIMATH PAMBHAN SWAMIGAL MEDICAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST NO.16/138, MARAVAR STREET MANDAPAM, RAMANATHAPURAM-623518. PAN AAFTS 9895 P VS. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX II, 2, V.P.RATHINASAMY NADAR ROAD, BIBIKULAM MADURAI 2. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI N.DEVANATHAN RESPONDENT BY : SHRI B.SRINIVAS O R D E R PER PRADEEP PARIKH, V.P. THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AGAINST THE OR DER OF THE LD. CIT DATED 11.2.2008 PASSED UNDER SEC.12A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT). THE GRIEVANCE OF TH E ASSESSEE IS AGAINST NOT BEING GRANTED REGISTRATION UNDER SEC.12A FROM THE DATE OF CREATION OF THE TRUST. 2. THE ASSESSEE TRUST WAS CREATED ON 9.6.2006 AND APPLIED FOR REGISTRATION ON 9.10.2007. THE CIT FOUN D THE TRUST TO BE GENUINE AND WAS SATISFIED THAT IT WAS E NTITLED TO REGISTRATION UNDER SEC.12A OF THE ACT. HOWEVER, CON SIDERING THE FACT THAT THE TRUST WAS CREATED ON 9.6.2006 AND THE APPLICATION WAS FILED ON 9.10.2007, REGISTRATION WA S GRANTED WITH EFFECT FROM 1.4.2007 RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YE AR 2008- 09 AND ONWARDS. 2 ITA 1945/09 3. THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL IS THAT THE RE ASON FOR NOT GRANTING REGISTRATION FROM 9.6.2006 APPEARS TO BE THAT THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION WAS DELAYED. HOWE VER, WITHOUT GIVING ANY OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN THE DELAY , THE CIT GRANTED REGISTRATION FROM 1.4.2007. THEREFORE, IT I S PLEADED THAT AN OPPORTUNITY MAY BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO FILE A CONDONATION PETITION BEFORE THE CIT. THE LD. D.R. R ELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE CIT. 4. WE HAVE DULY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AN D THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. AS PER CLAUSE (A) OF SEC.12A(1) , THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION IS TO BE MADE BEFORE T HE EXPIRY OF A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF THE CREATION OF THE TRUST. THE PROVISO TO CLAUSE (A) EMPOWERS THE CIT T O GRANT REGISTRATION FROM THE DATE OF CREATION OF THE TRUST IF HE IS SATISFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED FROM MAKI NG THE APPLICATION IN TIME FOR SUFFICIENT REASONS. IF HE I S NOT SO SATISFIED, THEN THE REGISTRATION HAS TO BE GRANTED FROM THE FIRST DAY OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR IN WHICH THE APPLIC ATION IS MADE. PERUSAL OF THE RECORDS SHOW THAT BEFORE GRANT ING REGISTRATION, THE CIT HAD CALLED FOR CERTAIN DETAIL S FROM THE ASSESSEE. THE PRINTED PROFORMA OF THE LETTER CALLIN G FOR DETAILS CONTAINS A CLAUSE TO THE EFFECT OF CALLING FOR AN EXPLANATION IF THE APPLICATION IS DELAYED. THOUGH T HE CIT HAS MARKED SEVERAL CLAUSES, HE HAS NOT MARKED THIS PART ICULAR CLAUSE ASKING FOR THE EXPLANATION FOR THE DELAY. NO T ONLY THAT, IT HAS BEEN WRITTEN IN THE LETTER BY HAND THAT THE ASSESSEE IS REQUESTED TO FILE DETAILS ONLY FOR THE MARKED PARAS . UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE EITH ER ANY CONDONATION PETITION OR DID IT OFFER ANY EXPLANATIO N. THUS, THE ASSESSEE WAS CLEARLY DENIED THE OPPORTUNITY OF EXPL AINING THE DELAY AND THEREBY THE REGISTRATION FROM THE DATE OF CREATION 3 ITA 1945/09 OF THE TRUST IF THE CIT WAS SATISFIED. ACCORDINGLY , WE RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE CIT. THE ASSESSEE IS PERMITTED TO FILE THE CONDONATION PETITION. THE CIT IS DIRECT ED TO CONSIDER THE SAME AND IF HE IS SATISFIED WITH THE R EASONS FOR THE DELAY, HE MAY GRANT REGISTRATION FROM THE DATE OF THE CREATION OF THE TRUST. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 1.7.2010. SD/- SD/- (GEORGE MATHAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER (PRADEEP PARIKH) VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI, DATED THE 1 ST JULY, 2010 MPO* COPY TO : APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT/CIT(A)/DR