2008 (4) TMI 746

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....IISurat, whereby the Commissioner of Income Tax has not condoned the delay caused in filing application under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act and also rejecting application of the respondent Authority for registration under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act? (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in coming to the conclusion that Surat Urban Development Authority is a 'charitable trust' and is required to be registered under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act? (iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has committed an error in interpreting the provisions of Section 10....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s not forming part of the total income and as all the activities carries out by the institution is for the advancement or towards income tax is not at all going to arise and, therefore, inadvertently, under genuine misunderstanding an application u/s 12A of the Income Tax Act, which ought to have been made, after withdrawal of exemption u/s 10(20A), could not be made. Therefore, they have requested to condone the delay for making this application. We satisfy with the reasoning that assessee was under the bonafide belief could not file application of registration within time but assessee has filed the application within 1 year. Therefore, we condone the delay and application is allowed. 5.1 During the course of hearing assessee has produced ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition V/s Mst. Katiji and others (167 ITR 471) (SC). 13. The learned counsel for the assessee, further relied upon the following two judgments:( i) In the case of Kachhi Hast Kala Maha Mandal Vs. CIT (2006) 100 TTJ 1112 (RJK). (ii) In the case of Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT (2006) 102 TTJ (Mumbai) 53. 14. The learned DR, on the other hand, has supported the order of the CIT and relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Adityapur Industrial Area Development Authority Vs. UOI (2006) 283 ITR 97 (SC) for the proposition that Local Authorities covered by Explanation of Section 20A does not include, Area Devel....