SHREE PORBANDAR JAIN SWETAMBAR TAPAGACHCHH SANGH TRUST PORBANDAR,PORBANDAR V. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

ITA 342/RJT/2025

AI Insights

The case involves two appeals by Shree Bhutnath Mahadev Mandir Porbandar and Shree Porbandar Jain Swetambar Tapagachchh Sangh Trust against the orders of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption), which had rejected their applications for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act and cancelled their provisional registrations. The primary issues were the rejection of their applications due to insufficient documentary evidence to prove the genuineness of the trusts' activities and the procedural aspect of the appeals being filed late. The Tribunal found that the delays were unintentional and caused by the incompetence of the assessees' old tax consultant, leading to the decision to condone the delays and remand the cases for a fresh examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 845814 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-03-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Rajkot
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 26-05-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. vs. CIT, M/s. Garg Bros. Pvt. Ltd. & Others vs. DCIT
• Laws Referred To: Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY PUNGLIA
• Assessee Lawyers: VIMAL DESAI
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 12A

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,राजकोट Ɋायपीठ,राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND DR. DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.393/RJT/2025 Assessment Year: (NA) (Physical Hearing) Shree Bhutnath Mahadev Mandir Porbandar, C/o. Sarda & Sarda, Sakar, 1st Floor, Dr. Radha-Krishnan, Opp. Rajkumar College, Rajkot-360001. बनाम/ Vs. The Commissioner of Income- tax(Exemption), Ahmedabad. ˕ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAKTS8352B (Appellant) (/Respondent) And आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.342/RJT/2025 Assessment Year: (NA) Shree Porbandar Jain Swetambar Tapagachchh Sangh Trust Porbandar, C/o. Sarda & Sarda, Sakar, 1st Floor, Dr. Radha-Krishnan, Opp. Rajkumar College, Rajkot-360001. बनाम/ Vs. The Commissioner of Income- tax(Exemption), Ahmedabad. ˕ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AADTS6648 B (Appellant) (/Respondent) िनधाŊįरती की ओर से/Appellant by : Shri Vimal Desai, AR राजˢ की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 07/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 27/03/2026 आदेश /ORDER Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM: The captioned two appeals filed by the different assessees’ are directed against the separate orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 393/RJT/2025 Shree Bhutnath Mahadev Mandir Porbander with others Page | 2 (Exemption), vide order dated 20.06.2024 and 19.08.2023, respectively, wherein the Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemption) (in short (Ld.CIT(E)) has rejected both the assessees’ application in Form No.10AB, u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act, and provisional registrations were also cancelled, as these assessees’ failed to file the necessary documentary evidences to prove the genuineness of the activities of the trust and activities of these trusts were not in consonance with the objective of the trusts. 2. Since the issue involved in these two appeals are identical and similar, therefore, this two appeals have been clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. 3. The appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No.393/Rjt/2025 is time barred by 588 days and appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No.342/Rjt/2025, is barred by limitation by 268 days. 4.Learned Counsel for the assessee, submitted that advocate of these two assessees’ trust committed the mistake and did not file the appeal on time before this Tribunal. These two assessees also filed new application in Form 10AB, under Section 12A (1) (ac)(iii) on 29.06.2024. These applications were also rejected on 06.12.2024, on the grounds that earlier application had already been rejected and the said rejection order had not been covered by the para 4.1 of CBDT's circular number 07 of 2024 dated 25.04.2024. The ld. counsel also submitted that assessees’ were also exercised alternative remedies to get the registration done, under bona-fide belief. Therefore, ld.Counsel prays the Bench that delay may be condoned and matter may be restored back to the file of ld.CIT(E ). These assessees’ trust undertake the responsibility to file the additional documents and evidences, to prove their claim, before the learned CIT (Exemption). Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 393/RJT/2025 Shree Bhutnath Mahadev Mandir Porbander with others Page | 3 5. On the other hand, learned DR for the revenue opposed the prayer of the assessee to condone the delay in these two assessees’ case. The ld DR also submitted detailed written submission on this account. The sum and substance of the written submission is that both assessee-trust, have failed to explain the sufficient cause. The ld.DR submitted that the period for filing an appeal cannot be extended simply because the appellant's case is hard and calls for sympathy or merely out of benevolence to the party seeking relief. In granting the indulgence and condoning the delay the appellate authority must be satisfied that there had been diligence on the part of the appellant and the latter was not guilty of negligence whatsoever. Therefore, learned DR for the revenue contended that delay should not be condoned in both these appeals. 6. We have heard both the parties on this preliminary issue. We note that the old tax consultant could not guide these assessees for any remedial measures due to his limitations and engagement in other matters. These assessees were thoroughly dependent upon advocate and believed that advocate would resolve the matter.Thus, the delay is unintentional in both appeals. The delay occurred due to reasons beyond assessee’s reasonable control. We note that on professional advice, the Courts and Tribunals have consistently held that in the matter of condonation of delay, a pragmatic and liberal approach should be taken. We note that unless there is mala fide or negligence on the part of the assessee, the delay should be condoned and appeals should not be rejected on technical ground of delay and they should be ordinarily decided on merits. We note that the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has also considered this aspect of condonation of delay in case of Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. (283 ITR 149) and held that: Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 393/RJT/2025 Shree Bhutnath Mahadev Mandir Porbander with others Page | 4 \"The position in law is well settled that an assessee should be granted due relief where it is due without standing on technicalities and the revenue must bear the established legal position in mind while dealing with applications seeking condonation of delay. It is necessary that liberal approach is adopted in such a matter so as to ensure that substantive rights are not defeated on the basis of technicalities or limitation.\" 7. We also note that the delay in filing appeals were not attributable to the assessee but due to the incompetence of the tax consultant, for which the assessee should not suffer. We note that both assessees-trust have applied for registration in Form No.10AB,u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii), however, since the assessee’s old tax consultant was not well conversant with the Income Tax Procedures and did not guide the assessee, therefore, a considerable delay in filing these appeals occurred.Therefore, we note that justification given by the assessee regarding the delay was due to the failure of old tax consultant. The consultant of the assessee was not well conversant with the online system & new amended provision of the Trust registration and did not comply to the said notices on time, therefore, assessee should not be penalized. We note that assessee has filed application in Form No.10AB u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act on 15.12.2023. This application has been rejected by ld.CIT(E). Thereafter, the assessee filed another new application in Form 10AB u/s.12A (1) (ac)(iii) of the Act, and the same was also rejected. The old consultant/advocate of the assessee did not guide the assessee. Reliance is also placed on the decision of I.T.A.T., 'C' Bench, Kolkata in the case of M/s. Garg Bros. Pvt. Ltd. & Others vs. DCIT [ITA Nos.2519 to 2521/Kol/2017, order dated 18.04.2018], wherein under similar set of facts and reasons, the Hon'ble Tribunal was pleased to condone the delay of 211 days by holding as under: \"3. We have heard both the parties on this preliminary issue. Having regard to the reasons given in the application for condonation of delay, we are of the considered opinion that assessee was under a bona fide belief that the impugned order of Pr. CIT was not appealable before this Tribunal since they were not advised by their Tax Consultants about this legal right. Later on, when a Senior Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 393/RJT/2025 Shree Bhutnath Mahadev Mandir Porbander with others Page | 5 Lawyer advised them to file an appeal, the assessees immediately took steps to file the appeals. Therefore, the delay caused. We note that delay was occurred because of the wrong advice of the Tax Professional for which assessees cannot be penalized. For the ends of justice, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 8. We note that the reasons given in the affidavits for condonation of delay in both the appeals were convincing and these reasons would constitute reasonable and sufficient cause for the delay in filing these appeals. Having heard both the parties and after having gone through the affidavit as well the delay condonation, application, we are of the considered opinion that in the interest of justice, the delay deserves to be condoned. In both these appeals, the sufficient cause and reason for delay, are similar and identical, therefore, we, condone the delay, of 588 days in filing of appeal in ITA No.393/Rjt/2025 and 268 days, delay in filing the appeal in ITA No.342/Rjt/2025, and admit both these appeals for hearing. 9. On merit, we have heard both the parties. In both these cases, these trusts were granted provisional registration u/s 12A of the Act and subsequently, applied for final registration under section 12A (1) (ac) (iii) of the Act vide application in Form 10AB. Thereafter, the CIT (E), Ahmedabad issued a notices on 11-07-2023 and 08-08-2023. In response to the said notices, the assessees have neither filed any submission nor sought any adjournment. Therefore, the CIT (E) rejected the said application and also cancelled the provisional registration granted earlier. We note that in both the appeals, both assessees had failed to file the documentary evidences before the Ld.CIT(E) to prove the genuineness of the activities and whether the activities of the trust are not in consonance with the objective of the trust or institution. Now, these assessee-trusts want to file additional documentary evidence before the Ld.CIT(E), for Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 393/RJT/2025 Shree Bhutnath Mahadev Mandir Porbander with others Page | 6 registration purpose, therefore, another opportunity may be granted to these assessees to plead their case before the Ld.CIT(E). 10. The Ld.CIT DR submitted before us that if the matter is remitted back to the file of Ld.CIT(E) then it would be a waste of time and resources of the lower authorities, hence, these appeals should be dismissed by the Tribunal. Alternatively, learned DR submitted that if the Bench wants to restore, these appeals back to the file of the ld CIT (Exemption), then heavy cost should be imposed on these assessee-trusts. We have considered submissions of ld.DR for the revenue, and therefore, on account of non- compliance attitude of the assessee, we impose a cost of Rs.10,000/- on assessee-trust in ITA No.393/Rjt/2025 in the case of Shree Bhutnath Mahadev Mandir Porbandar and also impose a cost of Rs.5000/- on another assessee-trust in ITA No.342/Rjt/2025 in the case of Shree Porbandar Jain Swetambar Tapagachchh Sangh Trust Porbandar. 11. We note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(E ) for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith.Therefore, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT( E) and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT( E) to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. It is needless to say that the assessee will be at liberty to adduce any evidences as deemed relevant before the ld.CIT(E) at the time of proceedings, before him, in consequence to this order and the Ld.CIT(E) shall allow the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard and to make relevant submissions, and then pass a speaking order which is fair and judicious. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 393/RJT/2025 Shree Bhutnath Mahadev Mandir Porbander with others Page | 7 12. In the combined result, both these appeals of the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 27/03/2026. Sd/- Sd/- [ Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha ] [ Dr. Arjun Lal Saini ] Ɋाियक सद˟/ Judicial Member लेखा सद˟/Accountant Member Rajkot Date: 27/03/2026. आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :  अपीलाथŎ/ The Appellant  ŮȑथŎ/ The Respondent  आयकर आयुƅ/ CIT  आयकर आयुƅ(अपील)/ The CIT(A)  िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण/ DR, ITAT, RAJKOT  गाडŊ फाईल/ Guard File By order, //True copy// Assistant Registrar/Sr. P.S./P.S. ITAT, Rajkot Printed from counselvise.com "