Koraput C.S.R. Hub, Koraput V. CIT, Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar

ITA 320/CTK/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4641 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 9 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 04-08-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RABIN CHOUDHURY
• Assessee Lawyers: N ANAND RAO
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Condonation of delay
• Section: 12AA

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH , CUTTACK [ , . . , BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV , J M & SHRI B.P.JAIN , A M ./ ITA NO. 3 20 /CTK/201 4 ( [ [ / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 12 - 20 3 ) KORAPUT C.S.R.HUB, AT/PO: JEYPORE RLY. STATION, DISTRICT KORAPUT VS. CIT, BHUBANESWAR ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : A A CTK 0019 P ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) [ /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI N.ANAND RAO /REVENUE BY : SHRI RA B IN CHOUDHURY / DATE OF HEARING : 2 9 TH MAY , 201 5 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 29 TH MA Y ,2015 / O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV (J.M) : TH IS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT , BHUBANESWAR , DATED 29 - 11 - 2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012 - 2013 , PASSED UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT ). 2. IT IS NOTED BY THE OFFICE THAT THIS APPEAL IS FILED LATE BY 355 DAYS FOR WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS MOVED AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY STATING THEREIN THAT EARLIER APPLICATION MOVED U/S.12AA OF THE ACT WAS REJECTED BY THE CIT AND THEREAFTER ASSESSEE HAS MOVED FRESH APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION AND THE SAME IS ALSO REJECTED. THEREAFTER THE ASSESSEE HAS TRIED TO CONTACT THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT FOR OPINION AND AFTER OBTAINING THE OPINION FROM THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT THE ASSESSEE HAS ITA NO . 3 20 /14 2 FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL. T HEREFORE, THERE IS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NON APPROACHING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN TIME AND T HE DELAY IN FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL MAY BE CONDO NED AND THE APPEAL MAY BE ADMITTED. 3. LEARNED DR ON THE OTHER HAND, SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE IS IN HABIT OF NO T FILING THE APPEAL IN TIME. EARLIER APPLICATION U/S.12AA WAS REJECT ED BY THE CI T AND ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY APPEAL AGAINST THE SAID ORDER. HE HAS APPLIED AFRESH FOR REGISTRATION BEFORE THE CIT AND IT WAS ALSO REJECTED. NOW, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL AFTER 355 DAYS AND DELAY IN FILING THE APPEA L HAS NOT BEEN SATISFACTORILY EXPLAINED, THEREFORE, THE SAME DESERVES TO BE REJECTED. 4. HAVING CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY, WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN A STAND THAT IT TOOK A LOT OF TIME TO CONTACT THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT FOR THE OPINION ON THE ORDER OF CIT . T HIS EXPLANATION OF TH E ASSESSEE IS NOT SATISFACTORY . IF THE ASSESSEE IS RUNNING A CHARITABLE INSTITUTION, HE MUST HAVE APPLIED F OR REGISTRATION U/S.12AA THROUGH A PROFESSIONAL AND ON THE REJECTION OF THE APPLICATION U/S.12AA A PROFESSIONAL MAY BE CONTACTED. THE REASONS FOR THE DE L AY EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ACCEPTABLE . IF T HE ASSESSEE WANT S TO ENGAGE IN CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES , H E SHOULD BE AWARE OF HIS RIGHTS. THEREFORE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE APPLICATION OF CONDONATION O F DELAY AND WE ACCORDINGLY REJECT THE SAME. CONSEQUENTLY, THIS APPEAL IS TIME BARRED AND IS HEREBY DISMISSED BEING NOT ADMITTED. 5 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED . ITA NO . 3 20 /14 3 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 29 / 05 / 201 5 . SD/ - SD/ - ( . . ) (B. P. JAIN) ( ) (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER CUTTACK ; DATED 29 /0 5 / 201 5 . . /PKM , . / PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : / BY ORDER, / ( ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, CUTTACK 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A), 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT , CUTTACK 6. [ / GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//