M/s Citrus Estate Tahliwala Jattan, Fazilka V. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Bathinda

ITA 497/ASR/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0724 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Next Hearing Date: 19-05-2016
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 28-07-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: P N ARORA
• Keywords: Non passing of speaking order; Right to appeal; Condonation of delay
• Section: 12A; 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLA TE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. A.D.JAIN, JUDIC IAL MEMBER AND SH. T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A NO.497(ASR)/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: CITRUS ESTATE TAHLIWALA CIT, BATHINDA JATTAN, VS. VPO TAHLIWALA JATTAN, PAN: AABAC 2728D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. P.N. ARORA (ADV.) RESPONDENT BY: SH. UMESH TAKYAR (DR.) DATE OF HEARING: 19.05.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 20.05.2016 ORDER PER T. S. KAPOOR (AM): THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE AGAINST THE O RDER OF LEARNED CIT, BATHINDA DATED 17.07.2012. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVE D WITH THE ACTION OF LEARNED CIT, BY WHICH HE HAD NOT GRANTED REGISTRATI ON U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. 2. AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS DELAYED BY 677 DAYS AND IN THIS RESPECT OUR ATTENTION WAS INVITED TO LETTER FILED FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY AL ONG WITH AFFIDAVIT CONTAINING THEREIN THE REASONS FOR DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL. THE LEARNED AR INVITING OUR ATTENTION TO PARA 3 OF SAID AFFIDAVIT SUBMITTED THAT THE COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE DID NOT ADVISE THE ASSESSEE TO FILE APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER ITA NO.497 (ASR)/2014 ASST. YEAR:..... 2 OF CIT REFUSING REGISTRATION U/S 12AA, THEREFORE, T HE APPEAL COULD NOT BE FILED IN TIME, HOWEVER, WHEN THE DEPARTMENT REOPENE D THE CASES OF THE ASSESSEE FOR ASST. YEAR 2009-10 AND 2011-12 AND PAS SED ORDER U/S 143(3), THE ASSESSEE ENGAGED NEW COUNSEL AND THE NEW COUNSE L ADVISED THE ASSESSEE TO FILE APPEAL BEFORE ITAT AGAINST THE ORD ER OF CIT REFUSING REGISTRATION. THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASS ESSEE CAN NOT BE DEPRIVED OF ITS RIGHT OF APPEAL ONLY BECAUSE OF A W RONG ADVISE. THEREFORE, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT FOR THE SAKE OF SUBSTANTIAL JUST ICE THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL MAY BE CONDONED. 3. THE LEARNED DR, DID NOT OBJECT TO THE REQUEST FO R CONDONING THE DELAY IN FILING OF THE APPEAL AND THEREFORE, WE AFT ER TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND IN THE INTEREST OF SUBSTANTIA L JUSTICE WE CONDONED THE DELAY AND LEARNED AR WAS ADVISED TO PROCEED WITH TH E ARGUMENTS. 4. THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT THE LEARNED CIT HA S PASSED A NON SPEAKING ORDER AND WITHOUT GOING THROUGH THE OBJECT S OF THE SOCIETY THE LEARNED CIT REJECTED THE REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF T HE ACT. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT LEARNED CIT ONLY ON THE BASIS OF NON DISCLOSUR E OF INTEREST INCOME FROM FDS OF THE ASSESSEE HELD THAT THE ACTIVITIES O F THE ASSESSEE WERE NOT GENUINE WHEREAS AT THE TIME OF REGISTRATION THE LEA RNED CIT SHOULD HAVE EXAMINED THE OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY. THE LEARNED AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE WAS A REGISTERED SOCIETY UNDER THE SOCIETI ES OF REGISTRATION ACT., AND REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE WAS PLACED AT PAGE-1 A ND COPY OF MEMORANDUM ITA NO.497 (ASR)/2014 ASST. YEAR:..... 3 AND ARTICLES WAS PLACED AT PAPER BOOK PAGE 2024. I T WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE LEARNED CIT HAD ALLOWED REGISTRA TION U/S 12A IN THE CASE OF CITRUS ESTATE V&PO: BADAL, DISTRICT: MUKTSA R WHEREIN THE OBJECTS WERE SIMILAR AND IN THIS RESPECT OUR ATTENTION WAS INVITED TO (PB PAGE 51), WHERE A COPY OF SUCH ORDER WAS PLACED. THEREFORE, I T WAS PRAYED THAT NECESSARY REGISTRATION MAY BE GRANTED. 5. THE LEARNED DR, HOWEVER, RELIED UPON THE ORDER O F LEARNED CIT. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL PARTIES AND HAVE GONE TH ROUGH THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT LEARNED CIT HAS PASS ED A NON SPEAKING ORDER AND WITHOUT GOING INTO THE AIMS AND OBJECTS O F THE SOCIETY REJECTED THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION HIGHLIGHTING CERTA IN DISCREPANCIES IN THE RECORDING OF INTEREST INCOME FROM FDS OF THE ASSESS EE, THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE, WE REMIT THIS ISSUE TO THE OFFICE OF LEARNED CIT WHO SHOULD PASS A SPEAKING ORDER AFTER GOING THROUGH TH E OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY AND AFTER GOING THROUGH THE REGISTRATION GRANTED BY LEARNED CIT IN THE CASE OF SOCIETY HAVING SIMILAR OBJECTS AS RELIED UPON BY LEARNED AR. 7. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE APPEAL FILED BY ASSES SEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20 TH MAY 2016. SD/- SD/- (A.D.JAIN) (T .S.KAPOOR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:20.05.2016. /PK/PS. ITA NO.497 (ASR)/2014 ASST. YEAR:..... 4 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE ASSESSEE: (2) THE (2) (3) THE CIT(A), (4) THE CIT, (5) THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., TRUE COPY BY ORDER