TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (10) TMI 81
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The learned CIT[A] is not justified in refusing to condone the delay in filing the appeal for the appellant's failure to file the appeal within the prescribed period of limitation U/s 249[2] of the Income-tax Act 1961 without appreciating that the appellant was pursuing a bonafide alternate remedy and hence, no appeal was filed before the expiry of limitation and thus, there was sufficient cause for delay in filing the appeal, which ought to have been condoned. 3. The Intimation u/s 143[1] of the Act dated 31/03/2023 is bad in law in as much as no specific reasons have been assigned for making the variation to the returned income and thus, the Intimation u/s 14....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... It is submitted that the assessee was registered u/s. 12AA of the act vide order dated 06/08/2020 and has thereafter obtained the registration u/s. 12AB of the act vide form 10AC dated 30/11/2022. 2.2. For the year under consideration, assessee filed its return of income on 06/11/2022 within the time allowed u/s. 139(4A) of the act declaring total income of Rs.1,78,148/-, being the shortfall in application of income during the year under consideration. It is submitted that, the assessee filed form 10B i.e. audit report, on 05/11/2022, before filing the return of income. Whereas the form 10B was required to be filed one month before the due date of filing the return of income. It was submitted that there was a delay of 29 days in filing ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....umstances of the case, it is satisfied that the assessee was not prevented by any reasonable cause from filing Form 10B with in the stipulated time. 5. In the light of CBDT circular No. 2/2020 dated 03-01- 2020 in F.No.197/55/2018-ITA-I, the delay in filing Form No. 10B for the A.Y. 2022-23 is here by rejected." 3. On receipt of the rejection order u/s. 119(2)(b), the assessee immediately filed appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) on 30/03/2024 against the intimation u/s. 143(1) of the act, thereby causing the delay of 364 days. 3.1. The Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay by observing as under: "2.7 In view of the above discussion and legal position, the delay of 364 days in filing of appeal in this ca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... has occurred in these circumstances and the assessee has not been able to represent its case on merits. 6. On the contrary, the Ld.DR though supported the orders passed by the authorities below, could not controvert the submissions of the Ld.AR. We have perused the submissions advanced by both sides in the light of records placed before us. 7. It is noted that the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) was due to bonafide reasons, as assessee was pursuing alternative remedy available under the act. It is surprising to note that the circulars issued by CBDT was available and was sufficient enough to condone the delay in filing form 10B which has not been considered by the authorities. The Ld.DR was also not in a positio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ice that the original return of income was filed on 28.09.2018. The acknowledgment and original return of income filed has been placed on record from pages 55-85 of the Paper Book submitted. Thus, the statement of the CIT(A) that return of income was not filed on time is incorrect. So non-filing of return within the due date prescribed cannot be a ground for denying the claim of exemption under section 11 of the Act. Further, we notice at page 14 of the CIT(A)'s Order, it has been stated that Form 10 is not filed before filing the return of income. This conclusion of the CIT(A) is contrary to the facts on record (refer Pages 101 and 102 of Paper Book submitted by assessee). The assessee had filed Form 10 electronically on 27.09.2018. So, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(Exemption) reported in [2024] 164 taxmann.com 757 * Decision of Hon'ble Ahmedabad Tribunal in case of ITO(E) vs. Takshshila Foundation (NGO) reported in [2024] 165 taxmann.com 735 * Decision of Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in case of ITO vs. P K Krishnan Educational Trust reported in [2024] 162 taxmann.com 899 * Decision of Hon'ble Kolkata Tribunal in case of Kedar Nath Saraf Charity Trust vs. DDIT reported in [2024] 161taxmann.com 671 8.2. Be that as it may, in the present facts of the case, there were circulars available at the time when the assessee had made applications to condone the delay in filing form 10B which has not been considered at all. It is further noted that, the Ld.CIT(A) has also not condoned the....