Arya Samaj Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi V. CIT (Exemption), New Delhi

ITA 2810/DEL/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Arya Samaj Safdarjung Enclave appealing against the decision of the CIT(E) which rejected their application for re-registration under section 12A(1)(ac) of the Income Tax Act due to an inadvertent error in selecting the wrong form during the e-filing process. The Tribunal found that the CIT(E) had erred in rejecting the application solely based on the form selection mistake and allowed the appeal partly, directing the CIT(E) to reconsider the application if a correct Form 10A is submitted within the stipulated time.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 108588 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-06-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 31-05-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 28-11-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 10B

Judgement Text

1 ITA No. 2810/Del/2022 Arya Samaj Safdarjung Enclave Vs. CIT(E) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 2810/DEL/2022 (A.Y:-) Arya Samaj Safdarjung Enclave B-2, Block, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi PAN No. AABAA5207F ( APPELLANT ) Vs. CIT(E) Civic Centre, Minto Road, New Delhi ( RESPONDENT ) ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 30/09/2022 passed by the Income Tax Department, CIT (Exemption)- Delhi, (hereinafter referred to ‘CIT(E)’ for Assessment Year NIL. 2. The assessee has raised the following Concise grounds of appeal:- Assessee by : Sh. Nem Singh, Adv Department by: Sh. Kanwaljit Singh, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 01.06.2023 Date of Pronouncement 13.06.2023 2 ITA No. 2810/Del/2022 Arya Samaj Safdarjung Enclave Vs. CIT(E) “1. The order u/s 12AB(1)(b)(ii)(B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 passed by the Ld. CIT(Exm.), Delhi rejecting the application filed u/s 12A(1)(ac) is arbitrary and unjust as the same is passed without properly appreciating the documents submissions e-filed in proceedings and also physically before his office on 22.09.2022. 2. The Ld CIT(Exm.) has erred in not considering the fact that the appellant is a registered society u/s 12A(a) and eligible for automatic re-registration for five years u/s 12AB(1)(a) r.w.s. 12A(1)(ac)(1) of the Act, while arbitrary rejecting the application 3. The Ld. CIT(Exm.) has failed to appreciate the request of the appellant to rectify the bona fide defect/mistake occurred during e- filing application Form which corrected by filing duly signed Form 10A along with rectification and condonation request in proceedings before him. 4. The Ld CIT(Exm.) has rejected the application arbitrary despite the fact that the dual conditions provide in section 12AB(1)(b)(1) of the Act, (A) the genuineness of activities of the society and (B) the compliance of such requirements of any other law for the time being in force and material for the purpose achieving its object, were fulfilled for his satisfaction, even for passing the order u/s 12AB(1)(b) of the Act. 5. The Ld CIT(Exm.) has completely brushed aside and disregarded the material evidence placed on record of the proceedings and fact that the appellant was genuinely conducting its activities strictly in accordance with its objects from last number of years and duly complied with all the necessary requirements of any other law and already registered u/s 12A(a), filing ITR 3 ITA No. 2810/Del/2022 Arya Samaj Safdarjung Enclave Vs. CIT(E) regularly. Therefore appellant deserves for grant of re- registration u/s 12AB(1)(a) of the Act for five years. 6. That in any view of the facts and circumstances of the case and law the appellant is entitled for grant of re-registration u/s 12AB(1)(a) r.w.s. 12A(1)(ac)(i) of the Act, which be kindly granted in the interest of natural justice. 7. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, remove, rescind, forgo or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal which are without prejudice to one another before or at the time of hearing of the appeal in the interest of natural justice.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that, the assessee e-filed an application for registration u/s 12A(1) (ac) of the Income Tax Act, (‘Act’ for short), but while selecting the Form 10A, the assessee wrongly selected Form 10AB. The CIT(E) while considering the application filed by the assessee u/s 12A(1)(a) of the Act, rejected the same for wrongly uploading the Form vide order dated 30/09/2022. Aggrieved by the order dated 30/09/2022, the assessee is before us by way of appeal on the grounds mentioned above. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee filed written submission in detail and submitted that the assessee inadvertently clicked and selected Form No. 10AB instead of Form No. 10A which resulted in rejection of the Application. The Assessee is legally entitled for re-registration as per the provision of Section 12A(1)(ac) of the Act. Thus, Ld. Assessee's Representative submitted that the 4 ITA No. 2810/Del/2022 Arya Samaj Safdarjung Enclave Vs. CIT(E) matter may be remanded to the file of CIT(E) Delhi to consider the case of the assessee de-novo. 5. The Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that though the uploading of Form 10AB instead of 10A is an error of the Assessee, the same cannot be rectified by the CIT(E), therefore, justified the action of the CIT(E) in rejecting the application filed u/s 12A(1)(ac) of the Act. 6. We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record. It is not in dispute that the assessee had submitted an online application on 24/03/2022 for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac) of the Act, but due to inadvertent mistake of the Assessee selected Form 10B instead except of Form 10A which ultimately resulted in rejection of the Application by the CIT(E). Further it is also found that the assessee had filed signed Form 10A along with the submission dated 22/09/2022 wherein submitted that it was a bonafide mistake on the part of the assessee in selecting of Form 10AB instead of Form 10A and requested to accept the Form 10A. 7. By considering the above facts and circumstances we deem it fit to condone the delay and permit the assessee to file a fresh Form 10A within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of these order and if such Form 10A is field, the CIT(E) shall consider the same on merit and decide application filed u/s 12A(1)(ac) in accordance with law without raising the issue of limitation. 5 ITA No. 2810/Del/2022 Arya Samaj Safdarjung Enclave Vs. CIT(E) 8. In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on : 13/06/2023. Sd/- Sd/- ( ANIL CHATURVEDI ) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated : 13/06/2023 *R.N, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to :- 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI 6 ITA No. 2810/Del/2022 Arya Samaj Safdarjung Enclave Vs. CIT(E)