TaxTMI Login
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
TaxTMI 
Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Upholds Registration for Assessee-Firm Despite Delay in Application</h1> <h3>INCOME TAX OFFICER. Versus JHANDUMAL MOHAN LAL.</h3> The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A) decision to grant registration to an assessee-firm for the assessment year 1977-78. Despite a delay in filing the ... - Issues:- Registration of assessee-firm for the assessment year 1977-78- Delay in filing registration application in Form No. 11- Justification for condoning the delay by the CIT (A)- Consideration of additional evidence by the CIT (A)- Application of the proviso to s. 184(4) of the IT Act, 1961Analysis:The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi-A concerned the registration of an assessee-firm for the assessment year 1977-78, which was initially allowed by the CIT (A) but challenged by the Department. The dispute arose due to a delay in filing the registration application in Form No. 11, as the original final application was not traceable, leading the assessee to file a duplicate application late by three months. The ITO refused registration, considering the firm as unregistered, citing insufficient reasons for condoning the delay.Upon appeal, the CIT (A) acknowledged the genuineness of the firm and the reasons for the delay presented by the assessee, including disputes between partners and the necessity to dissolve the old firm before Dewali. The CIT (A) considered the delay of three months justifiable and relied on the Supreme Court decision in Lal Hirday Narain to direct the ITO to reconsider the registration application filed on 19th February 1977.The Department appealed the CIT (A) decision, arguing against the condonation of the delay based on additional evidence, specifically an award dated 26th October 1975. The Tribunal deliberated on whether the CIT (A) was justified in condoning the delay, emphasizing that the contents of the award would have been included in the dissolution deed provided to the ITO earlier. The Tribunal found the CIT (A) had valid reasons for condoning the delay, as the circumstances warranted it, and upheld the order to allow registration to the firm if all other conditions were met, in line with the proviso to s. 184(4) of the IT Act, 1961.Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, affirming the decision of the CIT (A) to grant registration to the firm, provided all conditions regarding the genuineness of the firm and other formalities were satisfied.
TaxTMI 
