RAJASTHAN TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY, KOTA V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, JAIPUR

ITA 541/JPR/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9185 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-08-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 16-04-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMRISH BEDI
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJIV PANDEY; DAKSHAYANI PANDEY
• Keywords: Period of limitation; Retrospective amendment; Reasonable cause; Time period of passing order; Condonation of delay
• Section: 12A; 12AA; 148

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S,A JAIPUR JH JESK LH0 KEKZ] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH FOT; IKY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C. SHARMA, AM & SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 541/JP/2019 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2017-18 RAJASTHAN TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY RAWATBHATA ROAD, AKELGARH, KOTA-324010. CUKE VS. THE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AAALR 0232 K VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : MISS. DAKSHAYANI PANDEY (ADV.)& SHRI RAJIV PANDEY (C.A.) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI AMRISH BEDI (CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 06/08/2020 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 11/08/2020 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER DATED 06.11.2017 OF LD. CIT(E), JAIPUR PASSED U/S 12AA(1) (B) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT WHEREBY THE LD. CIT(E) GRANTED REGISTRATION U/S 12A W.E.F. 01.04.2017 AS AGAINST THE REGISTRATION SOUGHT BY TH E ASSESSEE WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT FROM 31.12.2005. DUE TO PREVAI LING COVID-19 PANDEMIC CONDITION THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL IS CON CLUDED THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE. ITA NO. 541/JP/2019 RAJASTHAN TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY VS. CIT(E) 2 2. THERE IS DELAY OF 442 DAYS IN FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION O F DELAY. THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE-UNIVER SITY HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED UNDER RAJASTHAN TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY AC T, 2006 BY THE GOVERNMENT OF RAJASTHAN HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE-UNIVE RSITY WAS INCORPORATED W.E.F. 31.12.2005. SHE HAS FURTHER SUB MITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS ILLEGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C)(II IAB) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. BUT AFTER NOTIFICATION BY CBDT WITH REFERE NCE TO RULE 2BBB DATED 12.12.2014 AND WITH REFERENCE TO DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN CASE OF VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY VS. ACIT 384 ITR 37 IT WAS ADVISED THAT FOR ABUNDANT CAUTION , THE UNIVERSITY SHOULD APPLY FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE IT AC T WITH EFFECT FROM ITS DATE OF INCORPORATION I.E. 31.12.2005. ACCORDINGLY, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION IN FORM 10A FOR REGISTRATI ON U/S 12A ON 26.05.2017 AND SOUGHT REGISTRATION WITH RETROSPECTI VE FROM 31.12.2005. THE LD. CIT(E) HAS GRANTED REGISTRATION W.E.F. 01.0 4.2017 I.E. 1 ST DAY OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR IN WHICH THE APPLICATION WAS SUB MITTED. THE LD. AR HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS HAVING A GOOD CA SE ON MERITS AS THE ASSESSEE WAS EARLIER ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION U/S 10( 23C)(IIIAB) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT AND ONLY BECAUSE OF AMENDMENT IN LAW AND THE ITA NO. 541/JP/2019 RAJASTHAN TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY VS. CIT(E) 3 JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT, THE ASSESSE E HAS APPLIED FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. THE DELAY IN FILI NG THE APPEAL IS ON ACCOUNT OF NON REALIZATION OF IMPACT FOR THE PERIOD FOR WHICH THE REGISTRATION WAS NOT GRANTED. THE ASSESSEE, THEREFO RE, SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT W.E.F. 31.12.2005 S INCE ITS INCEPTION HENCE, THIS APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IS FILED. THE REASON FOR DELAY ARE BONAFIDE ACCORDINGLY, THE LD. AR IS PLEAD ED THAT THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL MAY BE CONDONED AND THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE MAY BE DECIDED ON MERITS. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED TO THE CONDONATION OF DELAY AND SUBMITTED THAT AFTER THE R EGISTRATION GRANTED BY THE LD. CIT(E) THERE IS NO GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSE SSEE AND THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS NOTHING BUT LUXURY LITIGATION. EVEN THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT EXPLAINED ANY REASONABLE CAUSE FOR FILING THE APPEAL BELATEDLY. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AS WELL AS RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THE CAUSE OF DELAY AS FAILURE TO REALIZE THE IMPACT OF THE REGISTRATION G RANTED BY THE LD. CIT(E) PROSPECTIVELY INSTEAD OF RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT FROM 31.12.2005. THE ITA NO. 541/JP/2019 RAJASTHAN TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY VS. CIT(E) 4 RELEVANT PART OF THE REALIZATION IN THE APPLICATION FOR THE DELAY AS UNDER:- THE DELAY IN FILING THIS APPEAL IS FOR 1 YEAR AND 4 MONTHS IS ON ACCOUNT OF NON-REALIZATION OF THE IMPACT OF THE PER IOD FOR WHICH EXEMPTION U/S 12A HAS BEEN GIVEN. THE UNIVERSITY SE EKS EXEMPTION U/S 12A W.E.F. 31.12.2005 I.E. ITS INCEPT ION AND HENCE THIS APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY WHICH IS BONAFIDE AND MAY PLEASE BE GRANTED AS THE UNIVERSITY IS AN EDUCA TIONAL INSTITUTION FOUNDED THE STATE LEGISLATURE AND EXIST ING SOLELY FOR EDUCATION AND NOT FOR PURPOSES OF PROFIT. THE APPLI CATION OF DELAY IN FILING APPEAL DESERVES TO BE CONDONED AND IT IS HUMBLY PRAYED THE SAME MAY PLEASE BE CONDONED. EXCEPT THE VAGUE EXPLANATION OF NON REALIZATION THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT EXPLAINED ANY CAUSE OF DELAY WHICH HAS PREVENTED TH E ASSESSEE FOR FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL WITHIN THE PERIOD OF LIMI TATION. THE ASSESSEE IS NOT AN ILLITERATE ORDINARY PERSON BUT THE ASSESSEE IS A UNIVERSITY WHICH IS MANAGED BY WELL EDUCATED HIGH RANKING OFFICIAL. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO TAKING THE SERVICES OF THE TAX EXPERTS. EVEN IN SUP PORT OF THE APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY NO AFFIDAVIT IS FILED ON B EHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT WHILE CONDONING THE DELAY THE COURT SHOULD TAKE A LENIENT VIEW IN CONSTRUING THE SUFFICIENT CA USE AND SHOULD BEEN IN FAVOUR OF THE SUCH PARTY SO THAT THE CAUSE OF SU BSTANTIAL JUSTICE HAS TO BE PREFERRED AS AGAINST TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION. HOWEVER, IT IS ALWAYS ITA NO. 541/JP/2019 RAJASTHAN TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY VS. CIT(E) 5 A QUESTION WHETHER THE EXPLANATION AND REASON FOR D ELAY ARE BONAFIDE OR IS MERELY A DEVICE COVER AN ULTERIOR PURPOSE ON THE PART OF THE LITIGANT OR ATTEMPT TO SAW LIMITATION IN AN UNDER HAND WAY. FROM THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE APPLIED FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT ON 26.05.2017 AND THE LD. CIT(E) WHILE PASSING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 06.11.2017 G RANTED REGISTRATION W.E.F. 01.04.2017 AS IT IS PROVIDED SO U/S 12A/12AA OF THE ACT. THE POWER OF THE LD. CIT(E) U/S 12A/12AA OF TH E ACT IS NORMALLY RESTRICTED TO GRANT REGISTRATION FROM 1 ST DAY OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR IN WHICH THE APPLICATION IS MADE EXCEPT IN A CASE WHERE HE I S SATISFIED FOR THE REASONS TO BE RECORDED IN WRITING THAT THE INSTITUT ION/PERSON IN RECEIPT OF THE INCOME WAS PREVENTED FROM MAKING THE APPLICA TION BEFORE THE EXPIRY OF ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF CREATION OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION AS THE CASE MAY BE. IN THE CASE IN HAND THE ASSESSEE B EFORE THE LD. CIT(E) HAS EXPLAINED IN FILING OF THE APPLICATION FOR REGI STRATION IN THE YEAR 2017 BECAUSE OF AMENDMENT IN THE PROVISIONS AS WELL AS J UDGMENT OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT AND TILL THAT DATE THE ASSESSEE-UNIVE RSITY CLAIMED TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C)(IIIAB) OF THE AC T. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT EXPLAINED ANY REASON OR CAUSE WHIC H HAS PREVENTED THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT FILING THE APPLICATION FOR REG ISTRATION WITHIN THE ITA NO. 541/JP/2019 RAJASTHAN TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY VS. CIT(E) 6 PRESCRIBED PERIOD BEING ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF C REATION. HENCE, PRIMA FACIE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER(EX EMPTION) IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 12A/12AA OF THE ACT AND THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING NO GRIEVANCE. THEREAFTER THE AS SESSEE HAS ALL OF SUDDEN DECIDED TO FILE PRESENT APPEAL BELATEDLY. TH E ASSESSEE HAS NOT EXPLAINED AS TO WHAT CIRCUMSTANCE HAS LED TO THE AS SESSEE TO TOOK SUCH A LONG TIME OF MORE THAN ONE AND HALF YEAR TO FILE THE APPEAL. EVEN THE REASONS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE VERY VAGUE AN D EXHIBIT NEGLIGENCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE. WE DO AGREE WITH THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. DR THAT THIS IS A LUXURY LITI GATION AND THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT SERIOUS ABOUT THE FILING OF THE APPEAL. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT EXPLAINED FROM WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAS SOUGHT ADVICE OR WHAT PROCESS WAS UNDERTAKEN TO REACH THE CONCLUSION THAT IT HAS TO CHALLENGE THE IMPUGNED ORDER. IT IS SETTLED PROPOSITION OF LAW TH AT IN THE ABSENCE OF REASONABLE OR SUFFICIENT CAUSE THE DELAY CANNOT BE CONDONED MERELY AN EQUITABLE GROUND. THIS IS AN INORDINATE DELAY AND T HE ASSESSEE HAS PATENTLY FAILED TO EXPLAIN THE REASONABLE CAUSE FOR DELAY BUT HAS TAKEN AN EXCUSE OF NONE REALIZATION OF THE IMPACT OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER. IT IS NOT THE SOLE LITIGATION WITH THE TAX AUTHORITY BUT THE ASSESSEE IS CONTINUOUSLY INVOLVED IN THE LITIGATION AS CHALLENG ED THE NOTICE ISSUED BY ITA NO. 541/JP/2019 RAJASTHAN TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY VS. CIT(E) 7 THE AO U/S 148 OF THE ACT BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH C OURT AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE CANNOT TAKE SUCH EXCUSE OF NON REALIZI NG THE IMPACT OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER FOR SUCH A LONG TIME OF ONE AND HALF YEAR. THE NEGLIGENCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT TAKI NG NECESSARY STEPS FOR FILING THE APPEAL WITHIN THE LIMITATION PERIOD PROVIDED BY STATUTE CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS A REASONABLE OR SUFFICIENT CAUSE. EVEN THE ASSESSEE IS VERY CASUAL IN EXPLAINING THE REASONS I N THE APPLICATION OF CONDONATION OF DELAY WHICH IS NOT SUPPORTED BY A AF FIDAVIT. THE CAUSE EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE IS MUCH LESS THEN THE SUF FICIENT CAUSE AS TO WHY THE APPEAL WAS NOT FILED WITHIN THE LIMITATION OR IMMEDIATELY AFTER EXPIRY OF LIMITATION PERIOD. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY DETAIL AS TO WHAT STEPS THE ASSESSEE TOOK TO REACH TO THE DECISION OF CHALL ENGING THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL AND WHY THE ASS ESSEE HAS NOT FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL AS SOON AS POSSIBLE EVEN AFTER E XPIRY OF THE LIMITATION PERIOD. THEREFORE, THE EXPLANATION FOR D ELAY OF 442 DAYS IN OUR VIEW IS INSUFFICIENT, UNSATISFACTORY AND UNREASONAB LE. THEREFORE, THE VAGUE EXPLANATION WITHOUT ANY PARTICULARS OR DETAIL S CANNOT BE ACCEPTED AS A REASONABLE CAUSE. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IS DISMISSED AND CONSEQUENTLY THE APPEAL OF T HE ASSESSEE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE BEING BARRED BY LIMITATION. SINCE THE APPEAL OF THE ITA NO. 541/JP/2019 RAJASTHAN TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY VS. CIT(E) 8 ASSESSEE IS FOUND TO BE BARRED BY LIMITATION, THERE FORE, WE DO NOT PROPOSE TO GO TO THE MERITS OF THE APPEAL. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMI SSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11/08/2020. SD/- SD/- JESK LH0 KEKZ FOT; IKY JKO (RAMESH. C. SHARMA) (VIJAY PAL RAO) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 11/08/2020. * SANTOSH. VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- RAJASTHAN TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY, KOTA . 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR. 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE {ITA NO. 541/JP/2019} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR