Kelsi Vibhag Kelavani Mandal, Gandevi V. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Valsad

ITA 973/AHD/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2009] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0500 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-11-2009
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 04-11-2009
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 01-04-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: C K MISHRA
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Period of limitation; Condonation of delay; Set aside
• Section: 80G; 12A; 12

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH D AHMEDABAD BEFORE S/SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, J.M. AND D. C. AGRAWAL , A.M. ITA NO.973/AHD/2009 ASST. YEAR: KELSI VIBHAG KELAVNI MANDAL, AT & POST KELSI, P.O. GANDEVI, TAL. GANDEVI V/S . THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, VALSAD. PAN NO.AAATK 9614 J (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY :- SHRI SUNIL TALATI RESPONDENT BY:- SHRI C. K. MISHRA, SR. D.R. O R D E R PER D.C. AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT DTD.23.12.2008 WHEREIN HE HAS REJECTED THE APPLICAT ION U/S 80G FILED BY THE APPELLANT. THE GROUND RAISED IN THIS APPEAL IS AS UNDER :- 1. THE LEARNED CIT HAS ERRED IN REJECTING THE APPLI CATION U/S 80G ON THE GROUND THAT NO COPY OF REGISTRATION U/S 12A IS SUBMITTED NOR ANY PROOF REGARDING THE ACTIVITIES DO NE IS SUBMITTED. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE APPELLANT IS A GENUINE CHARITABLE TRUST APPROVED U/S 12A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT AND HAS BEEN REGULARLY GRANTED CERTIFICATE U/S 80G. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE APPELLANT TRUST BEING COMPLYING WITH ALL THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN IN SEC.11 & 12 THERE HAS B EEN NO ITA NO.973 /AHD/2009 2 VIOLATION IN SEC.13 AND THE APPELLANT TRUST HAVING COMPLIED WITH ALL THE CONDITIONS OF SEC.80G(5) IT IS SUBMITT ED THAT THE APPELLANT BE GRANTED EXEMPTION AND CERTIFICATE U/S 80G BE ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT TRUST. 2. IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE P RESENT APPEAL LATE BY 31 DAYS. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY WHICH IS DULY SUPPORTED BY AN AFFIDAVIT OF SHRI UKA BHAI RAVJIBHAI PATEL, RESIDENT OF BILLIMORA, TRUSTEE OF KESLI VIBHAG KELA WANI MANDAL. THE APPLICATION DATED 25.3.2009 READS AS UNDER :- RESPECTED SIRS, RE: FILING OF APPEAL AGAINST REJECTIO N OF RENEWAL OF EXEMPTION U/S 80G REQUEST FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY: THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT VALSAD REJECTING R ENEWAL OF EXEMPTION OF 80G OF THE TRUST DATED 23.12.2008 WAS RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT TRUST ON 2.1.09. HOWEVER, ON GOING THROUGH THE REASONS GIVEN IN THE SAID ORDER FOR REJECTION OF 80G EXEMPTION RENEWAL, IT WAS FELT THA T ON PERSUATION OF FACTS CIT MAY BE WILLING TO RECONSIDER THE REJEC TION. ACCORDINGLY A LETTER DATED 22.1.2009 (COPY ENCLOSED ) WAS SENT TO THE LD. CIT WHICH WAS RECEIVED BY THEM ON 30.1.2009 . THE SAID LETTER WAS HOWEVER NOT RESPONDED OR REPLIED TILL DA TE. IT WAS THEN ADVISED TO THE TRUST TO FILE AN APPEAL AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 BEFORE THE H ONBLE INCOME- TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL. IN THE PROCESS, THEREFORE SOME DELAY HAS TAKEN PLA CE IN FILING THE APPEAL WITHIN PRESCRIBED PERIOD. THE APPEAL IS SOON FILED ON RECEIVING THE ABOVE ADVICE. THERE BEING A REASONABL E CAUSE AS ABOVE LEADING TO SOME DELAY, THE DELAY MAY BE CONDO NED. AN AFFIDAVIT EVIDENCING ABOVE FACTS IS ENCLOSED. ITA NO.973 /AHD/2009 3 THANKING YOU, YOURS FAITHFULLY, SD/- PRESIDENT/SECRETARY KESLI VIBHAG KELAWANI MANDAL, AT & PO KESLI, TAL.GANDEVI, DIST. NAVSARI. 3. AFTER HEARING THE LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH TH E PARTIES WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE-TRUST WAS PREVENTED BY S UFFICIENT CAUSE FROM FILING THE APPEAL WITHIN THE PERIOD OF LIMITATION B EFORE THE TRIBUNAL. WE MAY ALSO STATE THAT AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE A PPEAL SHRI C.K. MISHRA, LD. DR COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE REASONS GIVEN IN TH E APPLICATION AND THE AFFIDAVIT FOR FILING THE APPEAL LATE. IT IS WELL SE TTLED LAW THAT JURISDICTION TO CONDONE DELAY SHOULD BE EXERCISED LIBERALLY, MATTER RELATING TO CONDONATION OF DELAY SHOULD BE JUDGED BROADLY AND N OT IN A PEDANTIC MANNER. THUS, CONSIDERING THE ENTIRE FACTS AND CIRC UMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE AND ALSO THE SETTLED POSITION OF LAW, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT DELAY OF 31 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL DESERVES TO B E CONDONED. ACCORDINGLY, WE CONDONE THE DELAY AND ADMIT THE APP EAL. 4. AS REGARDS THE MERITS OF THE CASE, WE FIND THAT A SIMILAR ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE ITAT, D-BENCH IN THE CASE OF NA RENDRA JAAMADAS DAMANIA V. CIT IN ITA NO.510/AHD/2009. THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 24.4.2009, RESTORED THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE CIT WITH CERTAIN DIRECTIONS AND GUIDELINES. PARAGRAPH 4 OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL READS AS UNDER : 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND GONE THROUG H THE CASE. THE APPLICANT TRUST IS PROVIDING MEDICAL RELIEF IN TERMS OF ITS OBJECTS AND HAS INCURRED EXPENDITURE ON CONSUMPTION S OF ITA NO.973 /AHD/2009 4 MEDICINES, DOCTORS SALARY, EXPENDITURE ON EYE CAMPS ETC. AS PER COPIES OF ACCOUNTS FOR THE YEARS 31.3.2004 TO 31.3. 2007 ENCLOSED WITH THE APPEAL. THE TRUST HAD EARLIER BEEN APPROVE D FOR THE PURPOSE OF SEC. OF THE ACT FOR THE PERIOD 1.4.1999 TO 31.3. 2008 AND HAD NOW SOUGHT FURTHER APPROVAL. IN TERMS OF RULE 11AA OF T HE IT RULES, 1962 READ WITH SEC.80G(5)(VI) OF THE ACT, THE APPLI CANT TRUST IS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION IN FORM NO.10G AL ONG WITH A COPY OF REGISTRATION GRANTED U/S 12A OF THE ACT, NO TES ON ACTIVITIES OF THE INSTITUTION SINCE ITS INCEPTION OR DURING TH E LAST THREE YEARS, WHICH EVER IS LESS AND COPY OF THE ACCOUNTS OF THE TRUST SINCE ITS INCEPTION OR DURING THE LAST THREE YEARS, WHICHEVER IS LESS. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE, THESE DOCUMENTS HAVE BEE N SUBMITTED WHILE THE CIT IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER HAS DISPUTED TH E CLAIM AND POINTED OUT THAT NO PROOF OF ACTIVITIES DONE IN DE TAIL HAS BEEN SUBMITTED THOUGH THE LD. AR VEHEMENTLY ARGUED BEFOR E US AND HAS ENCLOSED CERTAIN DOCUMENTS ALONG WITH THE APPEAL (P AGES 1 TO 94) ON PERUSAL OF THESE DOCUMENTS, WE FIND THAT THERE I S NOTHING TO SUGGEST THAT THE APPLICANT RESPONDED TO TWO SHOW CA USE NOTICES ISSUED BY THE LD. CIT NOR THE LD. AR REFERRED US TO ANY SUCH MATERIAL, EVIDENCING THAT THESE SHOW CAUSE NOTICES WERE RESPONDED TO. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WHEN THE APPLICANT TRUS T DO NOT SEEM TO HAVE RESPONDED TO THE VARIOUS NOTICES ISSUED BY THE CIT AND HAS ALREADY BEEN ACCORDED APPROVAL U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF TH E ACT FOR THE PERIOD 1.4.1999 TO 31.3.2008, IN THE INTEREST OF SU BSTANTIAL JUSTICE, WE RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT WI TH THE DIRECTIONS TO ALLOW ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPLICANT TRUST IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH GENUINENESS OF ITS ACTIVITIES AND THEREAFTER CONSID ER THE APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW EXPEDITIOUSLY. THE APPLICANT TRUST IS ALSO DIRECTED TO APPROACH THE LD. CIT ALON G WITH DETAILS OF THEIR ACTIVITIES SO AS TO ENABLE HIM TO ACCORD THE APPROVAL AT THE EARLIEST. THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE ARE SIMILAR TO THAT O F NARENDRA JAAMADAS DAMANIA (SUPRA) AND, THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOW ING THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL (SUPRA), WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 23.1 2.2008 PASSED BY THE CIT AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF CIT TO DE CIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH KEEPING IN VIEW THE DIRECTIONS AND GUIDELINES GIVEN IN THE CASE OF NARENDRA JAAMADAS DAMANIA (SUPRA). THE ASSESSEE TRU ST IS ALSO DIRECTED ITA NO.973 /AHD/2009 5 TO APPROACH THE CIT ALONG WITH THEIR ACTIVITIES SO AS TO ENABLE HIM TO ACCORD THE APPROVAL AT THE EARLIEST. 5. FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 13/11 /2009 SD/- SD/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) ( D.C.AGRAWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD, DATED : 13/11/2009 MAHATA/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO :- 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(APPEALS)- 4. THE CIT CONCERNS. 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, DEPUTY / ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT, AHMEDABAD