RAIGAR SAMAJ AND CHATRAWAS VIKAS SAMITI,JAIPUR V. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

ITA 31/JPR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves the Raigar Samaj and Chatrawas Vikas Samiti, which appealed against the decision of the CIT(E) rejecting their application for registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(E) had rejected the application on grounds including incompleteness and non-registration under the RPT Act, 1959. The appeal was initially filed late, leading to a request for condonation of delay, which the Tribunal granted, subject to costs. The Tribunal also noted the need for a fresh decision on the registration application, emphasizing the importance of the issues involved and the society's significance.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 469967 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: APJ Abdul Kalam Education and Welfare Trust vs. CIT(E)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARVIND KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: R.S. POONIA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

"vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A-Bench” JAIPUR Jh xxu xks;y] ys[kk lnL; ,o aJh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 31/JPR/2025 Raigar Samaj and Chatrawas Vikas Samit Shiv Mandir Raigar Mohalla, Ambedkar Nagar, Fatehpur Road, Sikar. cuke Vs. The CIT Exemption, Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AACAR0097D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assessee by : Shri R.S. Poonia, C.A. jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 01/04/2025 mn?kks\"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 01/04/2025 vkns'k@ORDER PER: NARINDER KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER On 19.09.2023, Learned CIT(E) rejected the application of the applicant Samiti, thereby not granting approval for its registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( hereinafter referred to as the “Act”). 2. Application under the above said provision of the Act was furnished online on 31.03.2023. It came be rejected on the following four grounds:- 2 ITA No.31/JPR/2025 Raigar Samaj and Chatrawas vikas Samiti  Incomplete from 10AB.  Non registration with RPT Act, 1959.  Genuineness of activities.  Made for the benefit of Rajgar Samaj. 3. As noticed above, the impugned order is dated 19.09.2023. Present appeal came to be presented on 11.01.2025. Registry raised a deficiency note that the appeal came to be presented after a delay of 408 days. 4. Initially, no application seeking condonation of delay was filed on behalf of the appellant. Only on 28.03.2025, an application has been presented seeking condonation of delay in filing of the appeal. 5. Arguments heard on the application. File perused. Whether to condone delay in filing of the appeal? 6. In the application seeking condonation of delay, it has been alleged that the appeal came to be presented after 408 days, as the representative of the society took time in having correct legal advice on the point of proper remedy after rejection of the application by Learned CIT(E). 7. Ld. AR for the appellant-applicant has submitted representative of the applicant was in dilemma as to whether the appropriate remedy was to submit fresh application before Learned CIT(E) or to challenge the impugned order by way of appeal before this Appellate Tribunal. Ultimately, President of the society engaged him (Learned C.A. present before us), 3 ITA No.31/JPR/2025 Raigar Samaj and Chatrawas vikas Samiti and on his advice, present appeal came to be presented on 11.01.2025. Accordingly, Ld. AR has requested for condonation of delay. 8. Admittedly, impugned order was passed on 19.09.2023, and served upon the applicant on the same date. Since, the appeal came to be presented on 11.01.2025, the applicant should have presented the appeal accompanied by the application seeking condonation of delay. However, the appeal was not accompanied by any such application. Admittedly, it has been presented on 28.03.2025. 9. When a party feels aggrieved by some order passed by an authority under the Act, said party is to resort to the appropriate remedy with diligence so as to challenge the same promptly. Law of limitation does not permit that such a party, feeling aggrieved by any order, just sleeps over the matter as regards the remedy available and knock at the door at the Tribunal as and when it gets awakened from sleep. Herein, firstly the representative of the applicant before Learned CIT(E) should have availed of legal assistance timely. Had it been done so, the Chartered Accountant or the concerned practitioner must have apprised appellant’s representative as to what was the appropriate remedy to challenge the impugned order. 4 ITA No.31/JPR/2025 Raigar Samaj and Chatrawas vikas Samiti There is nothing in the application to suggest as to on which date(s) the representative of the applicant contacted two to three consultants from the city. There is also no mention of the names of said consultants in the application. All this goes to shows that the representative of the applicant took the matter very casually. 10. Having gone through the impugned order, we find that representative of the applicant even failed to comply with the directions issued by Learned CIT(E) in connection with production of certain documents as regards, genuineness of activities of the applicant. Had requisite documents been produced, same would have helped in effective adjudication of the issues involved. This also shows negligence on the part of the representative of the applicant during proceedings before Learned CIT(E). 11. However, taking into consideration that the applicant is a society, and the issues involved are of great significance, we deem it a fit case to condone the delay in filing of the appeal, though subject of costs, having regard to the non diligence on the part of the applicant. 5 ITA No.31/JPR/2025 Raigar Samaj and Chatrawas vikas Samiti 12. Accordingly, the application seeking condonation of delay is allowed, but the applicant is burdened with cost of Rs.2,000/-. Costs to be deposited by the applicant in “Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund”. Discussion on Merits 13. Arguments have been advanced even on merits. Heard. File perused. Non registration of the Samiti under RPT Act, 1959 14. As noticed above, this is one of the grounds for rejection of the application. In this regard, it may mentioned here that Co-ordinate Bench ITAT, Jaipur has held in APJ Abdul Kalam Education and Welfare Trust vs. CIT(E) decided on 15.01.2025 that for the purposes of registration of such institutions, u/s 12AB of the Act, registration under RPT Act, 1959 is not one of the essential requirements. 15. The only submission put forth by Ld. AR for the appellant is that since the applicant could not avail of the opportunity granted by Learned CIT(E) by non production of certain relevant details and documents, in the interest of justice, matter may be remanded to Learned CIT(E) for decision of the applicant afresh, after providing reasonable opportunity so as to comply with directions of the Learned CIT(E). 6 ITA No.31/JPR/2025 Raigar Samaj and Chatrawas vikas Samiti 16. In para 4.1 of the impugned order, while dealing with the issue of genuineness of activities of the applicant society, Learned CIT(E) specifically mentioned about following details:-  List of donors.  Bills and vouchers of expenses.  Photograph of activities.  Details of social handle.  Digital footprint.  Details of Bank account details of last three years.” But, the applicant failed to comply with directions. Having regard to the issues involved, we deem it a fit case to remand the matter to Learned CIT(E) for decision afresh on the application seeking registration u/s 12AB of the Act, of course, while providing reasonable opportunity to the applicant of being heard. 17. Application under section 12AB of the Act was submitted on 31.03.2023. It came to be decided on 19.09.2023. Ample opportunities were granted by Learned CIT(E) by way of letters/notices dated 24.07.2023, 10.08.2023 and 19.08.2023. Learned CIT(E) has so observed in the impugned order. We find that having constraint of time for disposal of the application, Ld. CIT(E) had no objection, but to proceed to dispose of the application. 7 ITA No.31/JPR/2025 Raigar Samaj and Chatrawas vikas Samiti 18. The fact remains that when opportunities were granted to the applicant for production of certain records/documents, applicant should have complied with the same, while availing of the opportunities so granted. Since, there was no diligence on the part of applicant in this regard, the applicant is burdened with costs. Accordingly, applicant to deposit cost of Rs. 1,000/- in “Prime Minister’s National Relief Funds” and receipt to be submitted before Learned CIT(E) before commencement of the proceedings on remand. File be consigned to the record room after the needful is done by the office. Order pronounced in the open court on 01/04/2025. Sd/- Sd/- ¼xxu xks;y½ ¼ujsUnz dqekj½ (GAGAN GOYAL) (NARINDER KUMAR) ys[kk lnL; @Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 01/04/2025 *Santosh vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzsf’kr@Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant- Raigar Samaj and Chatrawas Vikas Samiti, Sikar. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- CIT(E), Jaipur. 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ The ld CIT 4. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur 5. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File ITA No. 31/JPR/2025) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, 8 ITA No.31/JPR/2025 Raigar Samaj and Chatrawas vikas Samiti lgk;d iathdkj@Asstt. Registrar "