TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 1393
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ure of the activities of the appellant. 4. The Ld. Commissioner has erred in law and on facts in stating that the Appellant has not submitted documents when the same is available on the records; 5. The Ld. Commissioner has erred in law and on facts in rejecting the recognization without considering the registration under section 12A of the Act; 6. The Order of the Learned Commissioner has fallen in error of facts as well as in law as the basis of rejection is based on an incorrect assumption of facts rendering the impugned order to be perverse; On the basis of the above grounds and other grounds which may be urged at the time of hearing with the consent of the Honourable Tribunal, it is prayed that the order passed under section 80G of the Act, to the extent, it is against the Appellant, be quashed and the relief sought to be granted. 3. At the outset, there is a delay of 61 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. The ld. A.R. of the assessee drawn our attention to the application for the condonation of delay filed along with an affidavit in original dated 30.1.2025, which are reproduced below for ease of reference and convenience :- ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ces before the ld. CIT(E). Further, considering the nature of activities and the organizational structure of assessee, there was a delay in taking internal approvals after consulting the professionals due to which there is a delay of 61 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. 5. Before us, the ld. A.R. of the assessee vehemently submitted that if the delay is not condoned, the assessee trust would be put to great hardship and irreparable injury and on the other hand, no hardship or injury would be caused to the revenue if condonation of delay is allowed and accordingly prayed that such unintended delay may be condoned and the appeal may be admitted for adjudication. 6. Ld. D.R. on the other hand, submitted that the appeal may be dismissed in limine as the delay was substantial and it is only due to the negligence of the assessee. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. It is to be noted that u/s 253(5) of the Act, the Tribunal may admit the appeal filed beyond the period of limitation where it has established that there exist a sufficient cause on the part of the assessee for not presenting the appeal within the prescri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ondoning the delay is rejected, it would amount to legalize injustice on technical ground when the Tribunal is capable of removing injustice and to do justice. Therefore, this Tribunal is bound to remove the injustice by condoning the delay on technicalities. If the delay is not condoned, it would amount to legalizing an illegal order which would result in unjust enrichment on the part of the State by retaining the tax relatable thereto. Under the scheme of Constitution, the Government cannot retain even a single pie of the individual citizen as tax, when it is not authorized by an authority of law. Therefore, if we refuse to condone the delay, that would amount to legalize an illegal and unconstitutional order passed by the lower authority. 7.3 Further, in the case of People Education & Economic Development Society Vs/ ITO reported in 100 ITD 87 (TM) (Chen), wherein held that "when substantial justice and technical consultation are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred for the other side cannot claim to have vested right in injustice being done because of non-deliberate delay". 7.4 The next question may arise whether delay was e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lege". The ld. A.R. of the assessee also submitted that additionally another entity namely "Bangalore Medical College Development Trust" which is a separate trust associated with Bangalore Medical College was also involved in the parallel section 80G proceedings before the same ld. CIT(E). The ld. CIT(E) issued identical notices to both i.e. the BMC Development Trust and the BMC Alumni Association in connection with the proceedings u/s 80G of the Act bearing the same notice date & due date. The BMC Development Trust have been successfully granted registration u/s 80G of the Act. The AR also drew our attention that in the course of section 80G proceedings, the notice was erroneously issued in the name of Bangalore Medical College instead of Bangalore Medical College Alumni Association thereby leading to confusion and procedural irregularity and accordingly prayed that one more opportunity may be granted before the ld. CIT(E) to represent its case. 11. Ld. D.R. on the other hand relied on the order of ld. CIT(E) however admitted that the order has been passed in the name of Bangalore Medical College and not in the name of assessee trust. 12. We have heard the rival submissions ....