आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री द ु व्वूरु आर एल रेड्डी, न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री एस बालाकृ ष्णन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.25/Viz/2020 & 26/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 & 2016-17) Sri Sai Lakshmi Charitable Trust D.No.11-1, Near Dooddipatla Kanchustambampalem West Godavari Dist. [PAN : AABTS6327B] Vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemptions) Rajahmundry (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant by : None प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent by : Shri ON Hari Prasadarao, DR सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date of Hearing : 18.07.2022 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date of Pronouncement : 23.08.2022 O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member : These appeals are filed by the assessee against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short ‘CIT(A)], Rajamahendravaram in ITA No.10130/2018-19/CIT(A)/RJY dated 25.10.2019 for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2015-16 and 2016-17. Since the grounds raised in these appeals are common, these appeals are clubbed, heard together and a common order is being passed for the sake of convenience as under. 2 ITA No.25/Viz/2020 & 26/Viz/2020, A.Y.2015-16 & 2016-17 Sri Sai Lakshmi Charitable Trust, West Godavari 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a public charitable institution registered u/s 12A, filed it’s return of income u/s 139 4A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’). The Centralized Processing Center (in short ‘CPC’), Bangalore processed the return and raised a demand of Rs.46,013/- without allowing exemption u/s 11 towards the income applied for charitable purposes. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the CPC, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee as time-barred, holding that the reasons advanced by the assessee for filing the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) with the delay of more than 14 months were not just and reasonable to condone the delay. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal and raised the following grounds. i. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A), Rajahmundry is not justified in discussing the appeal as barred by time for the following reasons. 1. In the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Commissioner of income tax ought to have condone the delay in filing the appeal as the Appellant was prevented by reasonable cause from filing the appeal in time and the entire period of delay was explained with the reasons for the delay being outside the control of the Appellant. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A) ought to have taken a liberal and justice oriented view instead of going by purely technical parameters and hence the dismissal of the appeal as barred by time is 3 ITA No.25/Viz/2020 & 26/Viz/2020, A.Y.2015-16 & 2016-17 Sri Sai Lakshmi Charitable Trust, West Godavari neither justified nor proper 3. In the facts and circumstances of the order of the dismissal of the order is contrary to the jaw in view of the fact that even on the merits also the Appellants case is squarely covered by the binding judicial precedents in the Appellants favour. ii. Levy of tax at the maximum marginal rate despite the gross receipts being less than the basic exemption limit The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A), Rajahmundry ought to have appreciated that the demand raised in the order is in correct and improper for the following reasons. 1. In the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A) ought to have appreciated that since the gross receipts did not exceed the basic exemption limit the levy of tax u/s. 143 (1) at the maximum marginal rate is legally , unsustainable. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A), ought to have appreciated the fact that the adjustments made in the intimation under appeal are not of prima facie nature and hence are legally unsustainable as travelling beyond the scope permissible u/s. 143 (1) of the IT, Act, 1961 5. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. 6. At the outset, the Ld.DR submitted that the registry has pointed out some defects, defect memo was also issued and served on the assessee, but the assessee neither rectified the mistake nor appeared before the Tribunal. Therefore, these two appeals are not maintainable and liable to be dismissed. 7. We have heard the Ld.DR and perused the material available on record. Admittedly, the registry has noticed some defects in the appeals, issued notice and the same was served on the assessee. Inspite of service of the same, the assessee failed to rectify the defects pointed out by the registry. Therefore, we are fully in agreement with the arguments of the 4 ITA No.25/Viz/2020 & 26/Viz/2020, A.Y.2015-16 & 2016-17 Sri Sai Lakshmi Charitable Trust, West Godavari Ld.DR that the appeals are not maintainable before the Tribunal. Hence, we dismiss the appeals filed by the assessee in-limine. 8. In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed. Order Pronounced in open Court on 23 rd August, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (एस बालाकृ ष्णन) (द ु व्वूरु आर.एल रेड्डी) (S.BALAKRISHNAN) (DUVVURU RL REDDY) लेखा सदस्य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्याधयकसदस्य/JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated : 23.08.2022 L.Rama, SPS आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the order forwarded to:- 1. ननधधाऩरती/ The Assessee– Sri Sai Lakshmi Charitable Trust, D.No.11-1, Near Dooddipatla, Kanchustambampalem, West Godavari Dist. 2. रधजस्व/The Revenue – Income Tax Officer (Exemptions), 5 th Floor, Siva Towers, Danavaipeta, Rajahmundry – 533 104 3. आयकर आयुक्त / Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Hyderabad 4. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Rajamahendravaram 5. नवभधगीय प्रनतनननध, आयकर अपीलीय अनधकरण, नवशधखधपटणम/ DR,ITAT, Visakhapatnam 6.गधर्ा फ़धईल / Guard file आदेशधनुसधर / BY ORDER Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Visakhapatnam