Abhinav Bindra Foundation Trust, Mohali V. CIT(Exemptions), Chandigarh

ITA 237/CHANDI/2023

AI Insights

The case involves the Abhinav Bindra Foundation Trust appealing against the orders of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax regarding the registration under sections 12AB and 80G of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment Year 2021-22. The appeals were filed with significant delays, which the Assessee sought to condone, citing misunderstandings and lack of advice from previous tax consultants. Upon review, the tribunal found the reasons provided by the Assessee sufficient to condone the delays. Subsequently, the Assessee decided to withdraw the appeals, which was unopposed by the CIT D.R., leading to the dismissal of the appeals as withdrawn.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 127848 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-05-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 01-05-2023
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Appeal Filed On: 23-04-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 12; 80G; 12AA

Judgement Text

आयकर अपील य अ धकरण,च डीगढ़ यायपीठ, च डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos. 2 3 6 & 2 3 7 / C H D / 2 0 2 3 नधा रण वष / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Abhinav Bindra Foundation Trust, Plot No. 107, Sector 82, S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali 140308 Vs. बनाम The CIT (CPC),] Bengluru (present jurisdiction with CIT(E) Chandigarh थायी लेखा सं. / PAN No: AACTA7058G अपीलाथ /Appellant यथ /Respondent नधा रती क ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CA राज व क ओर से/ Revenue by : Sh. Vivek Nangia, CIT DR स ु नवाई क तार#ख/Date of Hearing : 02.05.2023 उदघोषणा क तार#ख/Date of Pronouncement : 02.05.2023 आदेश/Order Per A.D. Jain, Vice President: These are Assessee’s appeals against the respective orders each dated 27.05.2021 and 09.07.2021 of the ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax for A.Y. 2021-22. 2. There is a delay of 637 days and 594 days respectively in filing the appeals. The Assessee, vide his two Applications each dated 24.04.2023 for condonation of delay, has furnished following facts and explanations, the relevant contents of which are reproduced below: 2 ITA No. 236/Chd/2023 “Kindly refer to the matter cited as subject above. The impugned order u/s 12AB was passed in this case on 27.05.2021 and the appeal there-against should have been filed before the Hon'ble ITAT on or before 26.07.2021. However, it has been filed on 24.04.2023 i.e. after a delay of 697 days. The reason for such delay and our explanation as to why such delay deserves to be condoned is as under: 1. In present case the appellant had applied for registration u/s 12AB of the Act on 23.02.2021. 2. It was already registered u/s 12AA in the old exemption regime and therefore, it was to be granted permanent registration u/s 12AB for 5 years. 3. However, by impugned order dd. 27.05.2021, it was granted provisional registration for only 3 years. 4. Since the appellant had been granted registration but of a lower category, this issue could not be appreciated or understood by the appellant at that time and was realized only now when the newly appointed tax consultant critically examined this fact. Further, the amendments in s. 12AB have been numerous in last 3 years and the earlier tax consultant also did not advice on such issues. In view of above peculiar facts, the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause for not filing the appeal in time against the order dd. 27.05.2021 passed u/s 12AB. These facts and circumstances also demonstrate that there existed reasonable and bonafide reason which led to delay in filing of the appeal. Hence, the said delay deserves to be condoned. It is most humbly and respectfully prayed that the said delay in filing of the appeal may please be condoned. We shall be highly obliged.” 3 4. Similarly, in ITA No. 237/Chd/2023, the relevant contents of the Assessee’s application for condonation of delay are reproduced below: ITA No.237/Chd/2023 “Kindly refer to the matter cited as subject above. The impugned order u/s 80G was passed in this case on 09.07.2021 and the appeal there-against should have been filed before the Hon'ble ITAT on or before 07.09.2021. However, it has been filed on 24.04.2023 i.e., after a delay of 594 days. The reason for such delay and our explanation as to why such delay deserves to be condoned is as under : 1. In present case the appellant had applied for registration u/s 80G of the Act on 05.03.2021. 2. It was already registered u/s 80G in the old regime and therefore, it was to be granted permanent registration u/s 80G for 5 years. 3. However, by impugned order dd. 09.07.2021, it was granted provisional registration for only 3 years. 4. Since the appellant had been granted registration but of a lower category, this issue could not be appreciated or understood by the appellant at that time and was realised only now when the newly appointed tax consultant critically examined this fact. Further, the amendments in s. 80G have been numerous in last 3 years and the earlier tax consultant also did not advice on such issues. In view of above peculiar facts, the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause for not filing the appeal in time against the order dt. 09.07.2021 passed u/s 80G. These facts and circumstances also demonstrate that there existed reasonable and bonafide reason which led to delay in filing of the appeal. Hence, the said delay deserves to be condoned. It is most humbly and respectfully prayed that the said delay in filing of the appeal may please be condoned. We shall be highly obliged.” 4 4. The Assessee, submitted that in view of the above peculiar facts, the Assessee was prevented by sufficient cause for not fining the appeal in time against the orders dated 27.5.2021 passed u/s 12 AB and dated 09.07.2021 passed u/s 80G of the Act. A request has been made to condone the delay in filing both the appeals. 5. We have considered the facts and reasoning furnished by the Assessee. In view of the detailed explanation and reasoning given by the Assessee, finding that the Assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the Appeals in time, the delay of 637 and 594 days respectively in filing the appeals is condoned. 6. The ld. Counsel for the Assessee has submitted applications, each dated 01.05.2023, and has requested the Bench to grant permission to withdraw the present appeals. 7. The learned CIT D.R. has no objection. Accordingly, we permit the Assessee to withdraw the present appeals. 8. In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced on 02.05.2023. Sd/- Sd/- (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) ( A.D. JAIN ) Accountant Member Vice President Dated : 02.05.2023 “आर.के.” 5 आदेश क त)ल*प अ+े*षत / Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. यथ / The Respondent 3. आयकर आय ु 0त/ CIT 4. *वभागीय त न4ध, आयकर अपील#य आ4धकरण, च6डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड फाईल/ Guard File आदेशान ु सार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar 6 1. Draft dictated 02.05.2023 Sr.PS 2. Draft first placed before author 02.05.2023 3. Approved draft comes to Sr.PS/PS 02.05.2023 4 Final draft placed before author 02.05.2023 5. Order signed and pronounced on 02.05.2023 6 File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 7. Date on which file goes to the AR 8. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk. 9. Date of dispatch of Order