M/S MANVATA FOUNDATION, MUKTSAR V. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

ITA 617/ASR/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2160 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-11-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 26-11-2019
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 25-09-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRABHJO T KAUR LD
• Assessee Lawyers: P N ARORA LD
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 80G; 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. N.K.CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. A.L.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.617/ASR/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: NIL M/S MANVATA FOUNDATION, OPPOSITE CANAL COLONY, BATHINDA ROAD, MUKTSAR VS. THE CIT(EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH [PAN:AAFAM 2057F] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. P. N. AROR A (LD. ADV.) RESPONDENT BY: SMT. PRABHJOT KAUR (LD. CIT-DR) DATE OF HEARING: 26.11.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 26.11.2019 ORDER PER N.K.CHOUDHRY, JM: THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE/APPELLANT AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 29.11.2018 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH, U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER CALLED AS THE ACT). 2. AT THE OUTSET, IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE BENCH THAT THERE IS A DELAY OF 240 DAYS IN THE FILING OF THE INSTANT APPEAL , THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELA Y FOR FILING OF THE INSTANT APPEAL U/S 253(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER CALLED AS THE ACT) BY SUBMITTING THAT TH E OPPORTUNITY ITA N0.617/ASR/ 2019 MANVATA FOUNDATION VS. CIT(E) 2 NOTICES SENT BY THE LD. CIT(E), CHANDIGARH THROUGH E-F ILING PORTAL WERE NOT CHECKED BY THE ASSESSEE AS ITS PASSWORD WAS AVAILABL E WITH ASSESSEES COUNSEL AND THE LATER ALSO DID NOT CHECK IT U P, DUE TO INADVERTENCE. THAT ON 09.09.2019 WHEN OUR COUNSEL CH ECKED UP PORTAL, THEN ONLY IT CAME TO HIS KNOWLEDGE THAT THE LD. CIT(E), CHANDIGARH HAS DECLINED TO GRANT APPROVAL U/S 80G OF T HE ACT VIDE ORDER DATED 29.11.2018. FOR THIS REASON, APPEAL AGAIN ST THE CAPTIONED ORDER DATED 29.11.2018 COULD NOT BE FILED W ITHIN THE STIPULATED TIME. THE DELAY IN SUBMITTING APPEAL IS NO T TO WILLFUL DEFAULT. IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE, THE DELAY IN SUBMITTING THE APPEAL MAY PLEASE BE CONDONED. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSE E HAS FAILED TO DEMONSTRATE THE DELAY OF EACH AND EVERY DAY , THEREFORE, THE SAME CANNOT BE ALLOWED. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND WHILE CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, IT REFLECTS THAT THE E-FILING PO RTAL WAS NOT CHECKED BY THE ASSESSEE DUE TO INADVERTENCE OF ASSESSEES COUNSE L WHICH RESULTED INTO DELAY OF FILING THE APPEAL. IN OU R CONSIDERED OPINION, THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE SEEMS TO B E PLAUSIBLE AND LOGICAL BUT CONSIDERING THE TENURE OF DELAY, THE SA ME CANNOT BE ALLOWED WITHOUT PUTTING CONDITION HENCE IN THE INTER EST OF JUSTICE AND CONSIDERING THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE INC LINED TO CONDONE THE DELAY SUBJECT TO DEPOSIT OF RS. 5,000/- IN T HE REVENUE DEPARTMENT WITHIN 01 MONTH OF THIS ORDER, CONSEQUENTLY THE DELAY STANDS CONDONED. 5. NOW COMING TO THE MERIT OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER. FROM THE ORDER, IT REFLECTS THAT APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSEEEE SOCIETY WAS ITA N0.617/ASR/ 2019 MANVATA FOUNDATION VS. CIT(E) 3 TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION BY THE LD. CIT(E) WHILE ISSUIN G QUESTIONNAIRE THOUGH ONLINE PORTAL ON DATED 29-10-2018 WITH A REQ UEST TO PROVIDE CLARIFICATION TO THE QUERIES RAISED ON 05-11-2018, HOW EVER THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY NEITHER APPEAR NOR FILED ANY CLARIFICATI ON/REPLY BEFORE THE LD. CIT(E). ULTIMATELY THE LD. CIT(E) RE JECTED THE APPLICATION FILED U/S 80G OF THE ACT BY HOLDING THAT THE APPLICATION IN THE ABSENCE OF REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OR 10(23)/10(2 3C) RESPECTIVELY, DID NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENT FOR APPROVAL AS MANDATED B Y RULE 1AA OF THE I.T. RULES, 1962 AND TO THAT EXTENT WAS VOID-AB-INI TIO . THE COMMISSIONER FINALLY HELD THAT THE REQUEST FOR GRANT OF APPROVAL U/S 80G IS T REATED AS PREMATURE AND IN THAT LIGHT DECLINED . AS IT IS UNDISPUTED FACT THAT AS ON TODAY AS WELL, THE ASSESSEE HAS NEITHER REGISTRATION U/S 1 2AA NOR U/S 10(23)/10(23C) OF THE ACT, THEREFORE IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION THE ORDER UNDER CHALLENGE DOES NOT SUFFER FROM ANY PERVERSI TY, ILLEGALITY AND/OR IMPROPRIETY, HENCE THE APPEAL UNDER CONSIDERATI ON IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. THE APPELLANT SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO APPLY AFRESH FO R GRANT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 80G OF THE ACT AFTER GETTING REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OR 10(23)/10(23C) OF THE ACT. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DI SMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26/1 1/2019. SD/- SD/- (DR. A.L.SAINI) (N.K.CHOUDHRY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDIC IAL MEMBER DATED: 26/11 /2019. /PK/ PS. ITA N0.617/ASR/ 2019 MANVATA FOUNDATION VS. CIT(E) 4 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THEN CIT(APPEALS) 5. SR DR, I.T.A.T. AMRITSAR 6. GUARD FILE TRUE COPY BY ORDER