TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (2) TMI 1277
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n under the said section is bad in law, illegal and void. 2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kota has erred in - A. Not granting registration under section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the Appellant Trust on frivolous grounds. B. Holding that the objects of the Appellant Trust are not charitable in nature in view of the provisions of section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and that its activities are profit oriented. C. Not granting the registration based on alleged profitability of the Appellant Trust and not considering the statutory objects for which the Appellant Trust functions. D. Going beyond the scope of section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and rejectin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssed by the AO on 30.11.2006 for the A.Y. 2004-05. The relevant para is mentioned here under :- " In view of the above referred decision it is clear that UIT is also an entity excluded from the exemption of section 10(20) after the above said explanation. Hence, from the above discussion it is clear that Urban Improvement Trust, Kota does not fall within the scope of section 10(20) of the IT Act and is liable to file its return of income. The exemption under clause (20) of section 10 would, therefore, not be available to UIT, etc. despite the fact that they may be deemed to be treated as local authorities under any other Central or State Legislation." 3. The appellant had preferred appeal against the orders passed by the AO for the A.Y 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....feel that the ld. CIT (A) was not justified in holding that income of UIT is exempt u/s 10(20) of the Act. The ld. CIT (A) has not decided other issues raised before him by the assessee because the ld. CIT (A) was of the opinion that income of the assessee was exempt u/s 10(20) of the Act. Since we are vacating the order of ld. CIT (A) on the issue of liability of exemption u/s 10(20) of the Act, therefore, other issues are required to be considered afresh by the ld. CIT (A). Accordingly the appeals are restored back on the file of the ld. CIT (A)." 5. Against the order passed by the Tribunal, the appellant filed appeal before the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court and the Hon'ble High Court has admitted the appeal vide order dated 23.05.2011. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ught condonation of delay in pursuing the appeal before us. The appellant has filed an Affidavit of the Accounts Officer giving the details for not filing the appeal in time before us and in para 7 of the said Affidavit reads as under :- " 7. That at the relevant point of time the seat of AO was vacant from 2008 to 2012 and the person on the immediate subordinate position also got frequently changed in as much as 12 persons got changed within the span of 5 years." 5.3. It is contended by the ld. Counsel for the appellant that there is a bonafide mistake in pursuing the appeal before the Tribunal and he has sought to explain the delay in filing the appeal from the order dated 28.11.2007 to 9.04.2013 on the basis of Affidavit filed on 11.0....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... sufficient cause from preferring the appeal within the prescribed period of limitation. Further, we notice that the appellant is a statutory body, having the provision of in-house legal advicer and is being assisted by the competent Lawyers and Chartered Accountants. The appellant had a complete opportunity to pursue the legal issue before this Tribunal immediately after the application for registration was rejected by the ld. CIT. However, the appellant choose to remain silent and have not wished or opted for agitating its right of appeal before this Tribunal. It is not the case of the appellant that the appellant was not aware of the filing of the appeal before this Tribunal. However, the appellant had speculated of preferring the remedi....