ITA NOS 1245 544 & 545 OF 2016 MANNAN EDUCATIONAL S OCIETY HYDERABAD PAGE 1 OF 5 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD B BENCH, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.1245/HYD/2015 & 544 AND 545/HYD/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEARS: NA) M/S. MANNAN EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY HYDERABAD PAN: AAATM 6830 E VS DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (E) HYDERABAD FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI K.C. DEVDAS FOR REVENUE : SMT. U. MINI CHANDRAN, DR O R D E R PER SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M. ALL ARE ASSESSEES APPEALS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE DIT(E) REJECTING THE ASSESSEES APPLICATION FOR REG ISTRATION U/S 12AA(1)(B)(I) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 W.E.F. 31.05.20 07 AND ALSO FOR REGISTRATION U/S 80G OF THE ACT. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE LEADING TO THE ABOVE APP EALS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE, A SOCIETY, IS ENGAGED IN CARRYIN G OUT EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES. IT MADE AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA AND ALSO U/S 80G OF THE ACT ON 31.5.2007. SINC E THE ASSESSEE DID NOT GET ANY COMMUNICATION FROM THE DEP ARTMENT ABOUT THE STATUS OF THE SAID APPLICATION, IT FILED ANOTHER APPLICATION DATED 19.03.2011. THE DIT (E) CONSIDERE D THE SAME DATE OF HEARING : 25.01.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03.02.2017 ITA NOS 1245 544 & 545 OF 2016 MANNAN EDUCATIONAL S OCIETY HYDERABAD PAGE 2 OF 5 AND GRANTED REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT W.E.F. 1.4.2010 VIDE PROCEEDINGS DATED 9.8.2011. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESS EE CLAIMED EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT FOR THE A.YS 2007-08 ONW ARDS. THE EXEMPTION WAS NOT GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE AND THERE FORE, THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (A) WHO CON FIRMED THE DISALLOWANCE BY HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN GRANTED REGISTRATION ONLY W.E.F. 1.4.2010 AND THEREFORE, TH E ASSESSEE IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION FOR THE EARLIER A.YS. AGGRIEV ED, THE ASSESSEE CAME IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.428/HYD/2015, 430/HYD/2015 AND 129/HYD/2015 FOR THE A.YS 2007-08 TO 2010-11 RESPECT IVELY, HAS UPHELD THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT (A), OBSERVING THAT THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA W.E.F. 31.5.2007 HAS TO B E CONSIDERED BY THE DIT (E) AND NOT BY THE LEARNED CIT (A) AND IT I S FOR THE ASSESSEE TO PURSUE THE MATTER WITH THE DIT (E) FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT ON 31.05.07. 3. AFTER THE RECEIPT OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED FRESH APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATI ON U/S 12A AS WELL AS 80G OF THE ACT W.E.F. 31.05.2007. THE SAID APPLICATIONS WERE ALSO REJECTED FOR NON-APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESS EE. IT IS THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT AT THIS POINT OF TIME, T HE ASSESSEE HAS COME TO KNOW THAT THE ASSESSEES APPLICATION DATED 31.05.2007 HAS BEEN REJECTED BY THE RELEVANT AUTHORITIES. THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, FILED APPEAL BEFORE US IN ITA NO.1245/HY D/2015 CHALLENGING THE ORDER OF THE DIT (E) DATED 29.10.20 07 REJECTING THE ASSESSEES APPLICATION DATED 31.05.2008 ALONG WITH AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY OF 1481 DAYS. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO CHALLENGED THE ORDER OF THE DIT (E) DATED 18.03.201 6 DISMISSING ITA NOS 1245 544 & 545 OF 2016 MANNAN EDUCATIONAL S OCIETY HYDERABAD PAGE 3 OF 5 THE FRESH APPLICATIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR RE GISTRATION U/S 12A & 80G OF THE ACT W.E.F. 31.05.2007. THUS, ALL T HE 3 APPEALS ARE NOW BEFORE US. 4. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED T HAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED AN APPLICATION DATED 31.05.2 007 ALONG WITH THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS BEFORE THE REVENUE AUTHORITI ES AND SINCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY COMMUNICATION ABOU T THE STATUS OF THE SAID APPLICATION, IT HAD FILED A FRESH APPLI CATION AND THE SAME WAS GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE. IT IS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE DELAY OF 1481 DAY S IS NOT INTENTIONAL OR WILLFUL AS THE ASSESSEE CAME TO KNOW ABOUT THE FATE OF HIS APPLICATION DATED 31.05.2007 ONLY AFTER THE DISPOSAL OF ASSESSEES APPEALS BY THE TRIBUNAL AND IMMEDIATELY, THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN NECESSARY STEPS TO FILE FRESH APPLICATION S BEFORE THE DIT(E) FOR THE RELIEF AND ALSO THE APPEAL BEFORE TH IS TRIBUNAL AND THEREFORE, SHOULD BE CONDONED AND THE REVENUE AUTHO RITIES SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO CONSIDER THE ASSESSEES APPLICATION AFRESH. 5. THE LEARNED DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, DREW OUR ATTE NTION TO THE FACT THAT THE APPLICATION DATED 31.05.2007 W AS NOT MADE TO THE CORRECT AUTHORITIES AND THAT INSPITE OF THE SAM E, THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES HAD CONSIDERED THE SAID APPLICATION AND BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT COMPLIED WITH THE REQUIREMENTS AND ALSO BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT APPEARED INSPITE OF SE RVICE OF NOTICE, THE SAID APPLICATION WAS REJECTED. THE LEAR NED DR THEREFORE, OPPOSED THE CONDONATION OF DELAY IN THE CASE IN ITA NO.1245/HYD/2015. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED CO UNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT SE RVED WITH THE ITA NOS 1245 544 & 545 OF 2016 MANNAN EDUCATIONAL S OCIETY HYDERABAD PAGE 4 OF 5 NOTICES OF HEARING OR THE FINAL ORDERS REJECTING TH E ASSESSEES APPLICATION AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE A FRESH APPLICATION AND AFTER CONSIDERING THE CASE ON MERIT , THE REGISTRATION U/S 12AA WAS GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED COUNSEL THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT IN THE INTEREST OF J USTICE, THE DIT (E) MAY BE DIRECTED TO CONSIDER THE ASSESSEES APPL ICATION FOR REGISTRATION W.E.F. 31.05.2007. 6. HAVING REGARD TO THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND THE M ATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE AN AP PLICATION ON 31.05.2007 WHICH ALSO BEARS AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF T HE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT. WE HAVE PERUSED THE RECORDS OF THE ASSESSEES APPEALS IN ITA NO.482/HYD/2015 & ITA NO.129/HYD/201 5 AND FIND THAT THOUGH THE COPY OF THE SAID ORDER WAS PLA CED IN THE EARLIER PROCEEDINGS BEFORE US, THE TRIBUNAL HAS ERR ONEOUSLY OBSERVED THAT THE SAID COPY IS NOT PLACED ON RECORD . THE LEARNED DR HAD PRODUCED THE RECORD ALSO BEFORE US IN PROOF OF THE FACT THAT THE SAID APPLICATION WAS CONSIDERED AND REJECT ED AND THAT THE ORDER OF REJECTION HAS BEEN COMMUNICATED TO THE ASS ESSEE THROUGH REGISTERED POST. HOWEVER, WE DO NOT FIND ANY ACKNOW LEDGMENT IN THE FILE. WE ALSO FIND THAT THE ORDER OF THE DIT (E ) REJECTING THE ASSESSEES APPLICATION DATED 31.05.2007 IS ONLY FOR NON- APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE AND IT IS NOT ON MERITS OF THE APPLICATION. EVEN THE SUBSEQUENT APPLICATIONS DATED 1.3.2016 ARE ALSO REJECTED FOR NON-APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE AN D NOT ON MERIT. THUS, IT IS SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEES CASE HAS NOT B EEN CONSIDERED ON MERIT AT ANY POINT OF TIME TILL 19.03.2011 ON WH ICH DATE, IT WAS HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS ELIGIBLE FOR REGISTRATIO N. SINCE IT IS PROVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE AN APPLICATION DA TED 31.05.2007, IN ITA NOS 1245 544 & 545 OF 2016 MANNAN EDUCATIONAL S OCIETY HYDERABAD PAGE 5 OF 5 THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE DEEM IT FIT AN D PROPER TO CONDONE THE DELAY OF 1481 DAYS AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE DIT (E) DATED 29.10.2007 REJECTING THE ASSESSEES APPLICATION DAT ED 31.05.2007 FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A AND ALSO EXEMPTION U/S 80G OF THE ACT AND DIRECT THE DIT (E) TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION AFRESH ON MERITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW. IN VIEW OF THE SAME, APPEALS IN ITA NO.544 & 545/HYD/2016 BECOME INFRUCTUOUS AND THE AS SESSEES APPEAL IN ITA NO. 1245/HYD/2015 IS TREATED AS ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS IN ITA NO.544 & 545/HYD/2 016 BECOME INFRUCTUOUS AND ARE ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED AN D THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IN ITA NO. 1245/HYD/2015 IS TREAT ED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 3 RD FEBRUARY, 2017. SD/- SD/- (S.RIFAUR RAHMAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (P. MADHAVI DEVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 3 RD FEBRUARY, 2017. VINODAN/SPS COPY TO: 1 M/S. MANNAN EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, H.NO. 8-2-684/3/ R ROAD NO.12, BANJARA HILLS, HYDERABAD 500034 2 DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) HYDERABAD 3 DDIT E) HYDERABAD 4 THE DR, ITAT HYDERABAD 5 GUARD FILE BY ORDER