The Srikakulam District Mahila Mutually Aided Co-Operative Federation Limited, Srikakula V. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) , Hyderabad

ITA 619/VIZ/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6596 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-04-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 18-12-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D K SONAWAL
• Section: 12; 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE SHRI N.K. CHOUDHRY, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 619 /VIZ/2018 THE SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT MAHILA MUTUALLY AIDED COOPERATIVE FEDERATION LTD., DRDA, COLLECTOR OFFICE, SRIKAKULAM. V S. CIT (EXEMPTIONS) , HYDERABAD . PAN NO. AABAT 5332 J (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI I.KAMA SASTRY , C A. DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI D.K. SONAWAL , CIT DR DATE OF HEARING : 06 / 0 4 /2021 . DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08 / 0 4 /2021 . O R D E R PER N.K. CHOUDHRY , JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE APPELLANT SOCIETY AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 07 / 09 /201 8 IMPUGNED HEREIN PASSED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTIONS ) [FOR SHORT , LD. COMMISSIONER] , HYDERABAD U/SEC. 1 2 AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'ACT') . 2. AT THE OUTSET, WE MAY OBSERVE THAT T HE APPELLANTS APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION FILED ON DATED 30 - 03 - 2018 WAS TAKEN FOR HEARING BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER WHILE ISSUING THE NOTICE 26.06.2018 FOR PERSONAL HEARING 2 ITA NO. 619 / VIZ /2018 ( THE SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT MAHILA MUTUALLY AIDED COOPERATIVE FEDERATION LTD. ) ON 02.08.2018 FOR FILING THE DOCUMENTS AND INFORMATION , HOWEVER THE APPELLANT NEITHER APPEARED FOR THE HEARING NOR FILED ANY EXPLANATION AND THEREF ORE IN THE ABSENCE OF APPELLANT, DOCUMENTS INTER - ALIA ENGLISH VERSION OF THE MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION/TRUST DEED/BYE LAWS AND RELEVANT INFORMATION ASKED FOR AND I N COMPELLING CIRCUMSTANCES THE LD. COMMISSIONER WAS CONSTRAINED TO REJECT THE APPELLANTS APPLICATION U/S 12 AA OF THE ACT , AS EX - PARTE . 3 . WE HAVE GIVEN OUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE ORDER IMPUGNED HEREIN. THE APPELLANT FAILED TO GIVE ANY PLAUSIBLE REASON FOR NON - APPEARANCE BEFORE THE LD. COMMISSIONER THEREFORE ALTHOUGH, THE INSTANT APPEAL OF THE APPELLANT IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED IN ORDER TO GIVE EFFECT TO THE PRINCIPLE THAT LAW DOES NOT ASSIST THE PERSON WHO IS INACTIV E AND SLEEPS OVER HIS RIGHTS BY ALLOWING THEM WHEN CHALLENGED OR DISPUTED TO REMAIN DORMANT, WITHOUT ASSERTING THEM IN A COURT OF LAW. THE, PRINCIPLE WHICH FORMS THE BASIS OF THIS RULE IS EXPRESSED IN THE MAXIM VIGILANTIBUS , NON DORMIENTIBUS , JURA SUBVENIU NT (LAW ASSISTS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT AND NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP OVER THEIR RIGHTS), BUT EVEN A VIGILANT LITIGANT IS PRONE TO COMMIT MISTAKES. AS THE APHORISM TO ERR IS HUMAN AND IS MORE A PRACTICAL NOTION OF HUMAN BEHAVIOR THAN AN ABSTRACT PHILOSOPHY, THE U NINTENTIONAL LAPSE ON THE PART OF A LITIGANT SHOULD NOT NORMALLY CAUSE THE DOORS OF THE JUDICATURE PERMANENTLY CLOSED BEFORE HIM. THE EFFORT OF THE COURT SHOULD NOT BE ONE OF FINDING MEANS TO PULL DOWN THE SHUTTERS OF ADJUDICATORY 3 ITA NO. 619 / VIZ /2018 ( THE SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT MAHILA MUTUALLY AIDED COOPERATIVE FEDERATION LTD. ) JURISDICTION BEFORE A PAR TY WHO SEEKS JUSTICE, ON ACCOUNT OF ANY MISTAKE COMMITTED BY HIM, BUT TO SEE WHETHER IT IS POSSIBLE TO ENTERTAIN HIS GRIEVANCE IF IT IS GENUINE. C ONSIDERING THE PE CULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FOR THE JUST DECISION OF C ASE, IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, I T WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO RESTORE BACK THE INSTANT CASE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(E) FOR DECISION AFRESH ON MERITS, WITHIN 06 MONTHS OF THIS ORDER, SUFFICE TO SAY, WHILE AFFORDING PROPER AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY (S) OF BEING HEARD TO THE APPELLANT , HENCE ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. WE MAY CLARIFY THAT IN CASE OF FURTHER FAILURE OR DEFAULT BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE THE LD. COMMISSIONER THEN IN THAT EVENTUALITY THE APPELLANT SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED FOR ANY LENIENCY AND THE LD. COMMISSIONER SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO DECIDE THE APPLICATION OF THE APPELLANT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, WHILE CONSIDERING THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 4 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE APPELLANT STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON TH IS 0 8 T H DAY OF APRIL , 2021 . S D / - S D / - (D.S. SUNDER SINGH) ( N.K. CHOUDHRY ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 0 8 T H APRIL , 20 2 1 . 4 ITA NO. 619 / VIZ /2018 ( THE SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT MAHILA MUTUALLY AIDED COOPERATIVE FEDERATION LTD. ) VR/ - COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT - THE SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT MAHILA MUTUALLY AIDED COOPERATIVE FEDERATION LTD., DRDA, COLLECTOR OFFICE, SRIKAKULAM. 2. THE REVENUE CIT (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD. 3. THE D.R . , VISAKHAPATNAM . 4. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER (VUKKEM RAMBABU) SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY, ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM.