TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (3) TMI 1273
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ection 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax, Shimla. The assessee authority has been constituted as a special area development authority vide notification of the Government of Himachal Pradesh. The assessee stated that the aims and objects fall under the definition of public charitable purpose. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax considering the material on record granted registration under section 12AA of the Act to the assessee authority for assessment year 2008-09 only. However, for assessment year 2009-10 and subsequent assessment years, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax was of the view that the objects of the assessee authority cannot be considered to be charitable purposes because of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed for assessment year 2008-09 only and the order had not been assailed till date. It is further stated that the assessee was acting under advice and the assessee was informed that the cause of action for challenging the impugned order would arise when the appeals against the assessment orders were decided. The learned counsel for assessee, therefore, submitted that the assessee was under the bona fide belief for not filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, the delay may be condoned. 5. On the other hand, the learned D.R for the Revenue strongly objected to the condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal beyond the period of limitation and submitted that the assessee has failed to explain the sufficient cause for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. It is not in dispute that after passing the impugned order, the same was served immediately upon the assessee. According to the impugned order, registration was refused to the assessee under section 12AA of the Act for the assessment year 2009-10 and subsequent assessment years. The assessee, however, availed benefit of impugned order till assessment year 2008-09. Therefore, it was within the knowledge of the assessee that no registration under section 12AA of the Act have been granted to the assessee for the assessment year 2009-10 and subsequent assessment years. The assessee, however, claimed in the application for condonation of delay that as per legal advice the as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....come under section 11 of the Act for any subsequent assessment years either in the regular assessments or in the consequential appeals filed before the learned CIT (Appeals). Thus the assessee failed to explain any sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal within the period of limitation before the Tribunal. Sufficient cause would mean a cause which is beyond the control of the assessee. Sufficient cause means which prevents the assessee acting under normal circumstances without negligence or inaction or want of bona fide. When the assessee was aware of the consequences of the impugned order that its income would not be exempt under section 11 of the Act from assessment year 2009-2010 onwards, the assessee should not have waited for fi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n Kabra (2002) 257 ITR 773, the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that where the Legislature spells out a period of limitation and provides for power to condone the delay as well, such delay can only be condoned only for sufficient and good reasons supported by cogent and proper evidence. It is settled principle of law that provisions relating to the specified period of limitation must be applied with their regour and effective consequences. In this case delay for filing the appeal late for only a few days was not condoned. In the case of Asstt. CIT Vs. Taggas Industries Development Ltd. (2002) 80 ITD 21 (Cal.), Tribunal, Calcutta Bench, Calcutta did not condone the delay for filing the appeal late by 13 days because the dela....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Supreme Court. In the absence of plausible and acceptable explanation, the delay could not be condoned mechanically merely because the Government or a wing of the Government was a party before the court. Though in a matter of condonation of delay when there was no gross negligence or deliberate inaction or lack of bona fide, a liberal concession had to be adopted to advance substantial justice, in the facts and circumstances, the claim on account of impersonal machinery and inherited bureaucratic methodology of making several notes could not be accepted in view of the modern technologies being used and available. Considering the fact that there was no proper explanation offered by the Department for the delay except mentioning of variou....