Sant Sujan Singhji Keertaniya Welfare Trust, New Delhi V. DIT (Exemptions), New Delhi

ITA 3246/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 66000 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-11-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 29-08-2012
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 26-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: M K MADAN
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Condonation of delay
• Section: 80G; 12A; 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: G NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.C.SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.S.KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-3246/DEL/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR - SANT SUJAN SINGHJI KEERTANIYA VS. DIT(EXEMPTI ONS), WELFARE TRUST, 24, 3 RD FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, PARK AREA, KAROL BAGH, DISTRICT CENTRE, LAXMI N AGAR, NEW DELHI NEW DELHI-92. PAN-AAITS2564B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. M.K.MADAN, CA RESPONDENT BY: DR. PRABHA KANT, DR. APPEAL HEARD ON-29.08.2012 ORDER PRONOUNC ED ON-27.11.2012 ORDER PER I.C.SUDHIR, JM THE ASSESSEE HAS QUESTIONED ORDER DATED 08.09.2009 OF LD. DIT(EXEMPTION) WHEREBY HE HAD REJECTED APPLICATION SEEKING EXEMPTI ON U/S 80G OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. IT HAS BEEN FURTHER IMPUGNED THAT LD. DIT(E) HAS WRONGLY REJECTED THE APPLICATION FILED U/S 80G MERELY ON THE GROUND THAT APPLICATION U/S 12A HAS BEEN REJECTED. 2. THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO MOVED APPLICATION U/S 253 (5) OF THE ACT FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING AN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST THE ORDER U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF THE ACT. IN SUPPORT OF THIS APPLICAT ION, LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT AN I.T.A .NO.-3246/DEL/2012 2 APPLICATION VIDE FORM NO-10G SEEKING GRANT OF APPRO VAL U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT WAS FILED BY THE APPELLANT ON 20.03. 2009. THE APPLICATION WAS FILED SEPARATELY FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A(A) VIDE FORM NO -10A BEFORE THE SAME AUTHORITY. VIDE LETTER DATED 23.05.2009, LD. ITO (EXEMPT) (HQR S) ON BEHALF OF DIT(EXEMPT) SOUGHT CERTAIN INFORMATION WHICH WAS FURNISHED BY L ETTER DATED 12.06.2009. THE LD. DIT(E) PASSED AN ORDER DATED 08.09.2009 U/S 12AA (I )(B) R.W.S 12A DENYING THE REGISTRATION TO THE APPELLANT. NO SEPARATE ORDER U /S 80G(5)(VI) WAS PASSED BY THE LD. DIT(E). HOWEVER, THE LD. DIT(E) REJECTED THE APPLI CATION U/S 80G(V) MERELY ON THE GROUND THAT THE APPELLANT WAS DENIED REGISTRATION U /S 12A(A) VIDE PARA NO-5 OF THE ORDER U/S 12A(A). AS THERE WAS ONE ORDER PASSED U/ S 12A(A)(I)(V) DISPOSING BOTH THE APPLICATION (FORM NO-10A AND FORM NO-10G), APPELLAN T ALSO FILED ONE APPEAL U/S 12A(A) AND EXEMPTION U/S 80G(5) GENUINELY BELIEVING THAT AGAINST ONE ORDER, TWO APPEALS COULD NOT BE FILED. MORE SO, DENIAL OF EXE MPTION U/S 80G WAS CONSEQUENT UPON REJECTION OF REGISTRATION, IT WAS CONSIDERED P RUDENT BY THE APPELLANT TO FILE A SINGLE APPEAL CONTAINING GROUNDS OF APPEAL RELATING TO 12A(A) & 80G(5). AT THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL AGAINST THE SAID COMMON ORDER OF LD. DIT(E) ON THE ISSUE OF REJECTION OF REGISTRATION IN ITA NO.-191/DEL/2010, THE TRIBUNAL REFUSED TO ENTERTAIN PLEA OF THE APPELLANT REGARDING EXEMPTION U/S 80G O N THE BASIS THAT SAME CANNOT BE ENTERTAINED IN THE SAID APPEAL BECAUSE ASSESSEE SHO ULD HAVE PREFERRED SEPARATE APPEAL U/S 253(I)(C) REGARDING REJECTION OF EXEMPTION U/S 80G. LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE APPELLANT HAS ACCORDINGLY MOVED THE PRESENT APPEAL AGAINST THE DENIAL OF APPROVAL U/S 80G BY THE LD. DIT(E). THUS, THE DELAY IN PREF ERRING THE PRESENT APPEAL IN- I.T.A .NO.-3246/DEL/2012 3 COMPLIANCE OF THE OBSERVATION OF THE TRIBUNAL ON 30 .03.2012 MAY BE CONDONED, PRAYED THE LD .AR. LD. DR OPPOSED THE APPLICATION WITH THE SUBMISSION THAT THE APPELLANT WAS GUIDED BY AN EXPERT. HENCE, THE REASON FOR DELAY C ANNOT BE HELD AS REASONABLE. 3. HAVING GONE THROUGH THE ABOVE EXPLANATION, WE FI ND THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT REASON FOR THE DELAY WITH THE APPELLANT TO PREFER P RESENT APPEAL AGAINST REJECTION OF APPROVAL U/S 80G BY THE LD. DIT(E). SINCE UNDER SO ME MISTAKEN BELIEF AND ADVISE, THE ASSESSEE HAD PREFERRED A SINGLE APPEAL AGAINST COMMON ORDER DATED 08.09.2009 OF LD. DIT(E) WHEREBY APPLICATION SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S 12A AND EXEMPTION U/S 80G OF THE ACT FILED ON 30.03.2009 HAVE BEEN DISPOSED O FF VIDE A COMMON ORDER. ONLY ON THE OBSERVATION OF THE TRIBUNAL ON 30.03.2012 IN ITA NO.-191/DEL./2010, THE APPELLANT CAME TO KNOW THAT IT SHOULD HAVE PREFERRE D SEPARATE APPEALS FOR THE ABOVE TWO PURPOSES. THE APPELLANT HAS ACCORDINGLY FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL. THUS, IT IS NOT THE CASE THAT APPELLANT HAD NOT QUESTIONED THE COMM ON ORDER DATED 08.09.2009 OF THE LD. DIT(E) IN TIME BUT IT IS A CASE THAT THE APPELL ANT IN PLACE OF COMMON APPEAL SHOULD HAVE FILED TWO SEPARATE APPEALS AGAINST THE REJECTION OF REGISTRATION SOUGHT U/S 12A OF THE ACT AND EXEMPTION SOUGHT U/S 80G OF THE ACT. THE APPELLANT HAD PREFERRED COMMON APPEAL AS ADVISED TO HIM BY ITS RE PRESENTATIVE AND WHEN IT CAME TO KNOW ABOUT THE MISTAKE, IT CORRECTED THE SAME WI THIN REASONABLE TIME. WE THUS CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFO RE THE TRIBUNAL. PARTIES WERE DIRECTED TO PROCEED ON THE MERITS OF THE APPEAL. I.T.A .NO.-3246/DEL/2012 4 4. LD. AR POINTED OUT THAT THE LD. DIT(E) HAS REJEC TED THE APPLICATION IN FORM NO-10G SEEKING EXEMPTION U/S 80G OF THE ACT ON THE BASIS THAT THE APPELLANT IS NOT REGISTERED U/S 12A(A) OF THE IT ACT AS IT IS EVIDEN T FROM PARA NO-5 OF THE ORDER IMPUGNED. HE SUBMITTED THAT IN THE MEANWHILE THE T RIBUNAL HAS RESTORED THE MATTER SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT, TO THE FIL E OF LD. DIT(E) FOR VERIFYING THE ORIGINAL TRUST DEED AND ON SUCH VERIFICATION REGIST RATION SHOULD BE GRANTED AND THUS FRESH CONSIDERATION IS REQUIRED BY THE LD. DIT(E) ON THE APPLICATION SEEKING EXEMPTION U/S 80G OF THE ACT IN THE BACKGROUND OF T HE ABOVE DEVELOPMENT DUE TO ORDER DATED 30.03.2012 OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 1 91/DEL./2010. LD. DR OPPOSED THE ABOVE SUBMISSION REGARDING AVAILABILITY OF THE APPELLANT FOR EXEMPTION U/S 80G OF THE ACT. 5. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE SUBMISSION ESPECIALLY THE ORDER DATED 30.03.2012 OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 191/DEL./2010 WHEREBY THE T RIBUNAL WHILE EXAMINING THE VALIDITY OF THE ORDER DATED 08.09.2009 WHEREBY THE LD. DIT(E) REJECTED APPELLANTS APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A, HAS OBSERVED THAT THE ONLY OBJECTION OF THE DIT(E) IS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT CONDUCTED ANY C HARITABLE ACTIVITIES. CONSEQUENTLY, HE HAD HELD THAT THE GENUINENESS OF T HE ACTIVITIES COULD NOT BE ESTABLISHED BUT HE HAD NOT DISPUTED THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRUST PER SE. LD. DIT(E) HAS NOT DISPUTED THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST WERE CHARITABLE IN NATURE. THEREFORE, REGISTRATION SHOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED. THE TRIBUNA L NOTED FURTHER THAT THE LD. DIT(E) HAS ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THE APPLICANT HAD NOT PRODUCED ORIGINAL TRUST DEED FOR VERIFICATION. FOR THIS LIMITED PURPOSE, THE TR IBUNAL HAS RESTORED THE MATTER OF I.T.A .NO.-3246/DEL/2012 5 REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT TO THE FILE OF LD. DIT(E) FOR VERIFYING THE ORIGINAL TRUST DEED AND ON SUCH VERIFICATION, THE REGISTRATI ON SHOULD BE GRANTED. UNDER THIS BACKGROUND, WE FIND IT PROPER TO SET ASIDE THE MATT ER TO THE FILE OF LD. DIT(E) TO GIVE FRESH CONSIDERATION ON THE APPLICATION OF THE APPEL LANT SEEKING EXEMPTION U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF THE ACT, AFTER VERIFYING THE ORIGINAL TRUST DEED AND AFTER EXAMINING THAT OTHER CONDITIONS REQUIRED TO BE FULFILLED U/S 80G O F THE ACT HAVE BEEN FULFILLED BY THE APPELLANT. IT IS NEEDLESS TO MENTION HERE THAT WHI LE DISPOSING OF THE APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION U/S 80G OF THE ACT, THE LD. DIT(E) WILL A FFORD OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE GROUND IS THUS ALLOWED FOR ST ATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATIST ICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27.11.2012. SD/- SD/- (T.S.KAPOOR) (I.C.SUDHIR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMB ER DATED: 27/11/2012 *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI