TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 1913
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....First, we take up ITA No. 454/Bang/2025 for adjudication. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :- BEFORE THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL - BANGLORE IN THE MATTER OF MARINE DRISHTI AND COASTAL FOUNDATION GROUNDS OF APPEAL I. Rejection of Registration u/s.12AB of the Act. 1. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) erred in passing an order dated 29/04/2024 rejecting the application for registration filed by the Appellant in Form 10AB dated 30/10/2023 only on the ground that the appellant has not commenced the activities as per object clause of the memorandum of association. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) erred in passing an order dated 29/04/2024 rejecting the application for registration filed by the Appellant in Form 10AB dated 30/10/2023, without appreciating that, the Appellant has received an order for provisional registration in Form 10AC dated 17/08/2022 for AY 2023 - 2024 to 2025 - 2026 hence the rejection of the application is bad in law and liable to be set aside. 3. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) failed to appreciate that the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....would be caused to the revenue if condonation of delay is allowed and accordingly prayed that such unintended delay may be condoned as there is sufficient cause and the appeal may be admitted for adjudication. 5. The 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 callous approach of the assessee. 6. 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 prescribed time. The explanation therefore, becomes relevant to determine whether the same reflects sufficient and reasonable cause on the part of the assessee in not filing this appeal within the prescribed time. On going through the above, we find that due the wrong advice of CA Neeraj Pathak who appeared before the ld. CIT(E), the assessee had filed once again revised application before the CIT(E) instead of filing appeal before the ITAT. The ld. CIT(E) once again ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred, for the other side cannot claim to have vested right for injustice being done because of nondeliberate delay. Therefore, we have to prefer substantial justice rather than technicality in deciding the issue. As observed by Apex Court, if the application of the assessee for condoning 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. 6.3 Further, in the case of People Education & Economic Development Society Vs/ ITO repo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for registration u/s 12AB of the Act and cancelled the registration on the ground that the assessee has not commenced its activities towards the attainment of the objects of the trust. 8. Aggrieved by the Order of the ld. CIT(E) dated 29/04/2024, the assessee has filed the present appeal before this Tribunal in ITA No. 454/Bang/2025 with a delay of 248 days. 9. Before us, ld. A.R. of the assessee vehemently submitted that the ld. CIT(E), Bangalore grossly erred in rejecting the registration on the ground that the assessee has not commenced its activity especially when the assessee trust had submitted the provisional financials along with the bank statement evidencing the commencement of the activities towards the objects. The ld. AR of the assessee submitted that it is not a case that no activities had been commenced but in fact very little amount spent towards the objects as the trust is at the inception stage. 10. The ld. D.R. appearing from the side of revenue relied on the order passed by ld. CIT(E), Bangalore. 11. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We take a note of the fact that the assessee was incorporated only on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....llup standee normal & designing along with the copy of invoice towards purchase of Rice, Sugar, Coffee etc. (Placed at pages 42-52 of Appeal Set.) Further, the assessee trust had also produced certain photographs (Placed at pages 53-70 of Appeal Set.) evidencing commencement of the activities by the assessee. 11.3 Therefore, we find force in the argument of ld. Counsel of the assessee that it is not a case that no activities had been commenced but in fact a little amount spent towards the objects as the trust is at the inception stage. We are of the firm opinion that for the purpose of granting registration, the ld. CIT(E) shall call for such documents or information or make such inquiry as he thinks necessary in order to satisfy himself about the twin object :- (a) the genuineness of the activity of the trust and (b) the compliance of such requirements of any other law for the time being in force by the trust or institution as are material for the purpose of achieving its object. 11.4 In the present case, there is not even a whisper about any non-genuineness of the activities carried on by the assessee trust. The only allegation by the ld. CIT(E) is that the assessee had not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ac)(vi) was selected. A technical glitch happened while filling the form, hence the order passed for rejection of registration u/s. 12AB may be quashed and set aside and direction may be granted to grant the approval. 3. Without prejudice to the above, the provisional registration is valid up to March 31, 2025, hence the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) ought not to have cancelled registration for the period up to March 31, 2025, hence, the cancellation of registration is bad in law and may be set aside. 4. Without prejudice to the above the appellant has satisfied all the conditions of registration and has not violated any provision of the Income-tax Act, hence, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) may be directed to grant the approval for registration u/s.12AB off the Act. 5. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, or delete any or all the above grounds of appeal. 14. Brief facts of the case are that after the rejection of the registration u/s 12AB of the Act by the ld. CIT(E) vide Order dated 29/04/2024, the assessee company again filed a revised application before the ld. CIT(E) in Form 10AB on 31/08/2024 for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... registration under Section 12AB of the Act. 3. Without prejudice to the above, the provisional registration was valid up to March 31, 2025 hence the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) ought not to have cancelled registration for the period up to March 31, 2025 hence, the cancellation of registration is bad in law. 4. That the appellant has satisfied all the conditions of registration and has not violated any provision of the Income-tax Act, hence, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) may be directed to grant the approval for registration u/s.12AB to the appellant. 5. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, or delete any or all the above grounds of appeal. 18. Brief fact of the case are that on receipt of application in Form No. 10AB dated 31/08/2024 for approval u/s 80G(5) of the Act, the ld. CIT(E) observed that assessee's application filed for registration u/s 12AB of the Act was rejected and registration cancelled. Further, the ld. CIT(E) also observed that the assessee was mandated to submit necessary documents to prove the genuineness of the activities of the trust or institution and fulfillment of all the....