TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (9) TMI 1673
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of registration certificate, certified copy of trust deed, copy of ITR along with computation of income, copy of Audit Report, copy of report of activities undertaken by the trust during last 3 years. 2. That on the basis of facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) Bhopal has erred in passing non speaking order without appraising the information submitted by the appellant. 3. That the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) Bhopal has rejected the application for registration without giving proper/reasonable opportunity of being heard and thus violating the law of natural justice. 4. That, assessee reserves the right to add, amend, alter or withdraw any ground/grounds of appeal at the time of hearing. 3. Briefly stated, assessee is a charitable society engaged in organizing various awareness program in villages, education, preservation of environment (including water shades, forests and wildlife), preservation of monuments or places or objects of artistic or historic interest and advancement of any other object of general public utility. The assessee had applied for granting of registration in Form ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er: 5. We went through the application for condonation of delay. The categorical submission has been made in the application for condonation of delay that the entire matter to file the appeal was in hold of the then Accountant of S.R. Sahu. whose services were terminated in end of November last 2021. It is not in dispute that the appeal which should have been filed within 60 days had expired on 15.10.2021. Since the COVID intervened, the appeal period in all the cases were extended by the Hon'ble Supreme Court up till 30.05.2022 and subsequently, the appeal was filed on 05.09.2022. The bona fide of the appellant can be assumed from the fact that the challan for filing the appeal was paid on 10.11.2021. Consequently, the intention on the part of the appellant can be gathered from the fact that some of the employees who was entrusted in the job to file the appeal, has failed to perform his duty. Eventually, his services were terminated. One of the reason has also been assigned that some raid was conducted on was entrusted to accountant, by the company and on account of non filing of the appeal, the services of concerned employee was terminated. In such case, the non fili....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rong selection of the counsel. Such contentions of the assessee are not acceptable, as recourse available regarding the re-application for registration u/s 12A was already exercised by the assessee within 3 days of the receipt of the order i.e., on 05.03.2024. The appeal before the tribunal was filed on 25.06.2024 with a delay of 55 days and the delay was allegedly attributed to the advice of legal counsel. Even the challan for filing of appeal as evident from the appeal memo in Form 36, was deposited belatedly on 25.06.2024 bearing challan serial no. 9670, BSR code 6390009 for Rs. 500/-, confirms that fact that the assessee has not acted vigilantly towards the filing of an appeal before the tribunal, which again is a distinguishable feature contrary to the facts of the case law relied upon. On the other hand, in the present case, the assessee is trying to demonstrate that the delay was occurred on account of improper advised from the counsel, though such fact has not been fortified by furnishing any admission through affidavit of the concerned counsel or other cogent evidence. At this juncture even if the assertions by the assessee are to be considered as true and correct and its ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l or by the assessee on the advice of counsel, if has any consequences the assessee has to face the same, and no benefit can be derived on account of such excuses / allegations. 10. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances in the present case, respectfully following the observations of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of M/s. Viconic Vyapar Pvt. Ltd. (supra), we do not find any merits in the request of Ld. AR for condonation of delay, stating the reason that it had occurred because of improper advise by the previous counsel, therefore, the request for condonation of delay by the assessee being bereft of substance, having no plausible explanation or sufficient cause towards the circumstances beyond the control of assessee, which prevented the assessee to file the appeal within stipulated period of limitation provided under the law, has been rendered as rejected. 11. On this aspect, we place reliance on the order of coordinate bench of the ITAT, Mumbai in the case of M/s. Phoenix Mills Ltd. Vs. Asstt. CIT in ITA No.6240/MUM/2007 for A.Y.1999-2000, dated 23.03.2020, had held that where an application for condonation of delay has been moved bonafide, then, t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n elaborating in the backdrop of sufficient reason that would justify condonation of the substantial delay involved in preferring of the captioned appeal, therefore, we decline to condone the same and, thus, without adverting to the merits of the case dismiss appeal of the assessee as barred by limitation. 14. In the result, the appeal of the assessee, without deliberating on the merits of the issues raised in the present appeal, dismissed as not maintainable, in terms of our aforesaid observations. Order pronounced in the open court on 20/09/2024. ============= Document 1 To, The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Raipur Respected Sir, Ref:- Navodit Samaj Sevi Sanstha Charama, C/O Harish Chandra Kange, Village Kurrutola, Teshil Charama, Kanker, (C.G.) 494337 Sub: Request for condonation of delay in filing of appeal. Hereby I would like to bring to your kind knowledge the following facts:- The appellant is a society which has applied for registration u/s 12A on 25/09/2023. The said registration application was rejected by an order dated 19/02/2024 which was physically received by the appellant on 02/03/2024. Subsequently the appellant consulted ....