AKHIL HIND MAHILA PARISHAD, MUMBAI V. ADDL. DIRECTOR OF I.T. (EXEM) RANGE II, MUMBAI

ITA 3794/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 48852 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 11-05-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R S ARNEJA
• Keywords: Charitable institution

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH A BEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER. ITA NOS.3794 & 3795 /MUM/10 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2004-05 & 2005-06) AKHIL HIND MAHILA PARISHAD KUM KUM HALL, M.G. ROAD, VILE PARLE (EAST), MUMBAI-400057 PAN AAATA0163C VS. ADDL. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), RG-II, MUMBAI. APPELLANT. RESPONDENT. APPELLANT BY : MR. PRAKASH JHUNJHUNWALA. RESPONDENT BY : MR. R.S. ARNEJA. O R D E R PER SHRI R. S. SYAL : THESE TWO APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE RELATING TO ASST . YEARS 2004-05 & 2005-06 ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE CONFIRMATION OF PE NALTY U/S.272A(2)(E) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE AS SESSEE IS A PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST WHICH WAS REQUIRED TO FILE ITS RETURN U/S.139 (4A) OF THE ACT BY THE DUE DATE. THE RETURNS FOR BOTH THE YEARS WERE ACTUALLY FILED ON 29.3.2006 AS AGAINST THE DUE DATES OF FILING ON 31.10.2004 AND 31.10.200 5 FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION, THEREBY CAUS ING DELAY OF 513 DAYS AND 149 DAYS RESPECTIVELY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IMPOS ED PENALTY U/S.272A(2)(E) AMOUNTING TO RS.51,300 AND RS.14,900 IN RESPECT OF THE THESE TWO A.YS. THE ITA NOS.3794 & 3795/MUM//10 - 2 - ASSESSEE CONTENDED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THAT THE A SSESSEE-TRUST WAS WORKING SINCE LAST 65 YEARS FOR THE WELFARE AND UPLIFTMENT OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN. IT WAS ALSO EXPLAINED THAT IT WAS REGULARLY FILING INC OME TAX RETURNS FOR THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS BUT THE DELAY IN FILING THE RETURNS FOR THESE TWO YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION OCCURRED DUE TO CHANGE IN OFFICE BEAR ERS OF THE TRUST WHO WERE NOT CONVERSANT WITH THE ACCOUNTING MATTERS. THE LD . CIT(A) WAS UNCONVINCED WITH THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION AND CHOSE TO UPHELD THE PENALTY ORDERS IN RESPECT OF BOTH THE YEARS. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE PENALTY HAS BEEN IMPOSED IN BOTH THE Y EARS FOR THE LATE FILING OF THE RETURN. AN AFFIDAVIT OF PRESIDENT OF THE TRUST HA S BEEN PLACED ON RECORD. AS PER THIS AFFIDAVIT, IT HAS BEEN DEPOSED THAT THE EA RLIER PRESIDENT DID NOT HAND OVER THE INCOME TAX DOCUMENTS TO THE NEW COMMITTEE AND ALSO AUDITOR DID NOT ADVICE FOR FILING THE RETURNS. IT WAS ONLY WHEN T HE AUDIT FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31.3.2006 WAS IN PROGRESS, THAT IT CAME TO THE NOTI CE OF THE NEW MANAGEMENT FOR THE FIRST TIME THAT THE RETURNS FOR EARLIER YEARS W ERE NOT FILED. THEREAFTER, THE EARLIER AUDITOR WAS REMOVED AND A NEW C.A. WAS APPO INTED WHO COMPLETED THE WORK AND ASSISTED IN FILING THE INCOME TAX RETURNS FOR BOTH THE YEARS. IT IS SEEN THAT THE RETURNS WERE FILED VOLUNTARILY BY THE ASSE SSEE. SECTION 272A (2)(E) IS SUBJECT TO SECTION 273B, AS PER WHICH IF A REASONAB LE CAUSE IS SHOWN FOR THE VIOLATION OF THE PENALTY PROVISION, THEN NO PENALTY SHALL BE IMPOSED. WE ARE SATISFIED WITH THE REASONABLENESS OF THE ABOVE DISC USSED CAUSE IN PRESENTING THE TWO RETURNS BELATEDLY. AS SUCH, THE CASE OF THE AS SESSEE IS COVERED U/S.273B. WE, THEREFORE, OVERTURN THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND ORDE R FOR THE DELETION OF THE PENALTY IN THESE TWO YEARS. ITA NOS.3794 & 3795/MUM//10 - 3 - IN THE RESULT BOTH THE APPEALS ARE A LLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25. 05.2011. SD/- SD/- (VIJAY PAL RAO) (R.S. SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNT ANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DT.25.05.2011. *GPR COPY TO : 1. THE ASSESSEE. 2. THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 3. CIT(APPEALS) 4. CIT 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ITAT, MUMBAI. BY ORDER DY./ASST.REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI