, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . , . !' , # $ BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.930/MDS./2014 M/S.ASSISTANCE TO INDIAN MINISTRIES TRUST , NO.1/151,V.K.V.RENGAMMAL COLONY,C BLOCK, N.G.G.O.COLONY -POST, COIMBATORE 641 021. VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, COMPANY WARD I, COIMBATORE. PAN AAATA 7535 P ( %& / APPELLANT ) ( '(%& / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : MR.A.S.SRIRAMAN,ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : MR.SANKARALINGAM,CIT,D.R / DATE OF HEARING : 14.07.2015 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17.07.2015 ) / O R D E R PER A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: ITA NO. 930/MDS/14 2 THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, AGAINST THE O RDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, COIMBATORE DATED 31.0 7.2012 IN C.NO.127(306)/CIT:CBE/2011-12 WHEREIN THE LD.CIT RE JECTED THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE TRUST IN FORM 10A SEEKING REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE INCOME TAX AC T, 1961. 2. THE ASSESSEE AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE CIT HAS RAISED SIX ELABORATE GROUNDS BEFORE US; HOWEVER, THE CRUX OF T HE ISSUE IS THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUST IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT, WHO HAD REFUSED TO GRANT REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESS EE IS A TRUST, CONSTITUTED BY TRUST DEED DATED 27.09.2001, FILED I TS ORIGINAL APPLICATION SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S. 12A OF THE AC T ON 03.12.2002 AND APPROVAL U/S.80G OF THE ACT. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE TRUST HAS AGAIN FILED AN APPLICATION ON 03.01.2012 SEEKING REGISTRA TION U/S.12A OF THE ACT. DURING THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LD.CIT, THE ASSESSEE HAD SUPPRESSED THE INFORMATION ABOUT ITS EARLIER FILING OF THE APPLICATION DATED 03.12.2002 SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S.12A AND A PPROVAL U/S.80G ITA NO. 930/MDS/14 3 OF THE ACT. IT WAS FURTHER LEARNT THAT THE ASSESSEE -TRUST HAS RECEIVED VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS FROM FOREIGN COUNTRIES. ON FURTHER PERUSAL OF THE FACTS, IT WAS REVEALED THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUST HAD WILLFULLY SUPPRESSED VITAL INFORMATION REGARDING ITS ACTIVITI ES SINCE ITS FORMATION. IT WAS ALSO REVEALED THAT ON THE EARLIER OCCASION REGISTRATION U/S.12A OF THE ACT WAS NOT GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE. DUE TO THESE DUBIOUS ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST, THE LD.CIT REFUSED TO GRANT REGISTRATION U/S.12A OF THE ACT. 4. AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL, IT WAS NO TICED BY THE BENCH THAT THERE WAS A DELAY OF 265 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL. THE ASSESSEES ONLY CONTENTION WAS THAT THE DELAY WAS D UE TO LAPSE ON THE PART OF THE STAFF OF THE ASSESSEE DUE TO WHICH THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FILE THE APPEAL IN TIME. ON LOOKING AT THE CON DUCT AND ATTITUDE OF THE ASSESSEE SINCE ITS INCEPTION FROM 27.09.2001, W E FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED TO SERIOUSLY PURSUE ITS OBJECTS. FURTHER, THE REASONS CITED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR DELAY IN FILING T HE APPEAL BEFORE US ALSO DO NOT SOUND REASONABLE. THEREFORE, WE HEREBY DISMISS THE ITA NO. 930/MDS/14 4 APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE DUE TO THE DELAY OF 265 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 17 TH JULY, 2015 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . !' ) (V. DURGA RAO) ( . ) (A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 17 TH JULY, 2015. K S SUNDARAM. COPY TO: ASSESSEE/AO/CIT (A)/CIT/D.R./GUARD FILE