Nai Roshni, Hazaribagh V. CIT, Hazaribagh

ITA 60/RAN/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0024 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 4 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 07-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHOUDHURY ORAON
• Assessee Lawyers: M. K. CHOUDHURY
• Section: 32; 147; 131; 68; 246; 69; 145; 27; 148; 54; 37; 6; 56; 263; 63; 132; 12; 28; 144; 10; 90; 154; 2; 11; 15; 271(1)(b); 139; 92; 12A; 195

Judgement Text

1 ITA NO. 60/RAN/2013, AY ---- NAI ROSHNI IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL: RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI [BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, JM & SHRI M. BALAGAN ESH, AM] I.T.A NO. 60/RAN/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: --------- NAI ROSHNI, CHATRA MORE, CHAMPARAN VS. COMMISSIONE R OF INCOME-TAX, DIST., HAZARIBAGH-825406 HAZARIBAGH (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DATE OF HEARING: 14.09.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 16.09.2016 FOR THE APPELLANT: SHRI M. K. CHOUDHURY, ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT: SHRI CHOUDHURY ORAON, DR ORDER PER SHRI M. BALAGANESH, AM: THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT , HAZARIBAGH VIDE MEMO NO. CIT/HZB/TECH/12A(A)/37/06-07/1127-29 DATED 17.0 7.2006 GRANTING REGISTRATION U/S. 12A(A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 195 6 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) W.E.F. 01.04.2005. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE I S A TRUST CONSTITUTED ON 02.03.2001 AND HAD PREFERRED AN APPLICATION IN FORM NO. 10A FOR SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S. 12A(A) OF THE ACT ON 28.04.2003 O RIGINALLY. THIS APPLICATION WAS NOT ACTED UPON BY THE LD. CIT BUT INSTEAD DIRECTED THE ASSESSEE TO FILE AUDIT REPORT FOR THE PURPOSE OF VERIFICATION OF THE ACTIVITIES C ARRIED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE TRUST. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE FILED ANOTHER APPLICATION IN FORM NO. 10A ON 27.01.2006 ALONG WITH AUDITED ACCOUNTS FOR THE YEARS ENDED 31. 03.2003, 31.03.2004 AND 31.03.2005 SEEKING REGISTRATION W.E.F. THE DATE OF CREATION OF THE TRUST OR AT THE MOST AT LEAST W.E.F. 01.04.2003 ONWARDS. THE LD. CIT GR ANTED REGISTRATION U/S. 12A(A) OF THE ACT VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 17.07.2006 W.E.F. 01.0 4.2005 AS AGAINST THE CLAIM MADE BY THE ASSESSEE, SUPRA. AGAINST THIS ORDER DATED 1 7.07.2006, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. THE ASSESSEE ALSO PREFERRED A PE TITION U/S. 154 OF THE ACT ON 01.10.2007 BEFORE THE LD. CIT SEEKING REGISTRATION W.E.F. 01.04.2003 AND ALSO ANOTHER REMINDER WAS GIVEN ON 02.12.2008. 2 ITA NO. 60/RAN/2013, AY ---- NAI ROSHNI 3. IT WAS ARGUED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSE E THAT THE SAID APPLICATION U/S. 154 OF THE ACT WAS NOT DISPOSED OF BY THE LD. CIT A S ON DATE. THEREAFTER THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL SEEKING FOR REGISTRATION W.E.F. 01.04.2003 WITH A DELAY OF 2380 DAYS FOR WHICH A DE LAY CONDONATION PETITION IN PROPER FORM WAS FILED ADDUCING THE AFORESAID REASON S. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE FIND THAT THE DELAY DESERVES TO BE CONDONED AND THE APPEAL IS HEREBY ADMITTED FOR ADJUDICATION AS LD. DR HAS NOT MADE ANY SERIOUS OBJECTION. 4. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ARGUED THAT THE LD. CIT INDEED HAD POWER TO CONDONE THE DELAY IN PREFERRING APPLICATION BEFORE HIM AND WAS ENTITLED TO GRANT REGISTRATION FROM THE DATE OF CREATION OF THE TRUST IF SUFFICIENT CAUSES WERE ADDUCED BEFORE HIM FOR THE DELAY. THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIO N 12A OF THE ACT, AS IT THEN PREVAILED (I.E. PRIOR TO 01.06.2007) VIDE SECOND PR OVISO TO SECTION 12A(1)(A) OF THE ACT CLEARLY CONFERRED POWER ON THE LD. CIT TO GRANT REGISTRATION FROM THE DATE OF CREATION OF THE TRUST. 5. WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT DID NOT GIVE ANY FINDIN G WITH REGARD TO THIS PARTICULAR PROVISION OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF GRANT ING REGISTRATION FROM THE DATE OF CREATION OF THE TRUST. HOWEVER, WE FIND THAT IN TH E FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ASSESSEE TRUST HAD INDEED PREFERRED APPLI CATION ORIGINALLY FOR SEEKING REGISTRATION ON 28.04.2003, WHICH WAS ADMITTEDLY B EYOND THE STATUTORY PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF CREATION OF THE TRUST AS MANDATED IN SECTION 12A OF THE ACT. THAT APPLICATION DATED 28.04.2003 WAS NEVER D ISPOSED OF BY THE LD. CIT ON THE GROUND THAT THE SAME WAS NOT TRACEABLE IN THE OFFICE OF THE INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT. WE FIND THAT IT CANNOT BE A SUFFICIENT REASON ON WHICH AN ORDER COULD NOT HAVE BEEN PASSED AS IT COULD BE SEEN THAT THE A SSESSEE WAS NOT AT FAULT FOR THE SAME THEREBY DENYING REGISTRATION WHICH WAS LEGITIM ATELY ENTITLED AT LEAST FROM THE DATE OF APPLICATION I.E. 28.04.2003. THE LAW NOW I S WELL SETTLED BY THE RECENT DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CI T VS. SOCIETY FOR THE PROMOTION OF EDUCATION, ALLAHABAD IN CIVIL APPEAL N O.1478 OF 2016 DATED 16.02.2016 WHEREIN ANY APPLICATION FOR GRANTING REG ISTRATION PREFERRED BY THE 3 ITA NO. 60/RAN/2013, AY ---- NAI ROSHNI ASSESSEE, WHICH IS NOT DISPOSED OF WITHIN A PERIOD OF SIX MONTHS SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN GRANTED REGISTRATION IN FAVOUR OF THE ASS ESSEE FROM THE DATE OF FILING THE APPLICATION. HERE, THE DISPUTE, WHICH IS BEFORE US, IS NOT ON PASSING OF THE ORDER/NON- PASSING OF THE ORDER BEYOND THE PERIOD OF SIX MONTH S. THE DISPUTE IS ONLY WITH REGARD TO GRANTING OF REGISTRATION FROM THE DATE OF FILING THE APPLICATION, WHICH IN THE PRESENT CASE, WAS ORIGINALLY FILED BY THE ASSESSEE TRUST ON 28.04.2003. WE ALSO FIND THAT THE LD. CIT INDEED HAD POWER TO GRANT REGISTRA TION U/S. 12A OF THE ACT FROM THE DATE OF FILING THE APPLICATION IN RESPECT OF APPLIC ATION PREFERRED PRIOR TO 01.06.2007 VIDE SECOND PROVISO TO SECTION12A(1)(A) OF THE ACT. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE DESERVES TO BE GRANTED REGIS TRATION U/S. 12A OF THE ACT W.E.F. THE DATE OF FILING OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION I.E. ON 28.04.2003, WHICH WOULD MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. THEREF ORE, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16.09.2016 SD/- SD/- (N. V. VASUDEVAN) (M. BALAGANESH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTAN T MEMBER DATED :16TH SEPTEMBER, 2016 JD.(SR.P.S.) COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT - NAI ROSHNI, HAZARIBAGH 2 RESPONDENT - CIT, HAZARIBAGH 3 . THE CIT(A), 4. 5. CIT DR, ITAT, RANCHI / TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, SR. PVT. SECY .