TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (10) TMI 591
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ccount and the same were not verifiable. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (Exemptions) erred in rejecting the application in Form IOAB dated 29.06.2024 without providing sufficient opportunity to establish the genuineness of the activities of the Trust. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (Exemptions) failed to appreciate that when oral donations were made by cash and the same had been taken to the respective accounts either towards corpus or donation, then the same could not be a ground to cancel the Appellant's Registration. 4. For these and such other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing, the Appellant prays that the appeal may please be allowed to meet ends of justice. 3. At the outset, the ld. A.R. of the assessee submitted that there is a delay of 195 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. The ld. A.R. of the assessee also drew our attention to an affidavit in original sworn before the notary public dated 25.06.2026 stating the reasons for the delay, which is reproduced below for ease of reference and convenience: 4. Before us, the ld. AR of the ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appeal filed beyond the period of limitation where it has established that there exists a sufficient cause on the part of the assessee for not presenting the appeals within the prescribed time. The explanation therefore, becomes relevant to determine whether the same reflect sufficient and reasonable cause on the part of the assessee in not filing these appeals within the prescribed time. We have gone through the reasons explained by the assessee in which we found that after rejection of application in form 10AB dated 29/06/2024, the assessee subsequently filed another application on 31/03/2025 before the same ld. CIT (Exemptions), Bangalore which was also rejected. The assessee thereafter upon legal advice by the counsel, filed an appeal against the earlier rejection order dated 30.12.2024 thereby causing a delay of 195 days. 6.1 While considering a similar issue the Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji and ORs. (167 ITR 471) laid down six principles. For the purpose of convenience, the principles laid down by the Apex Court are reproduced hereunder: (1) Ordinarily, a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal late. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the lower authority. 6.3 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". 6.4 The next question may arise whether delay was excessive or inordinate. There is no question of any excessive or inordinate when the reason stated by the assessee was a reasonable cause for not filing the appeal. We have to see the cause for the delay. When there was a reasonable cause, the period of delay may not be relevant factor. In fact, the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. K.S.P. Shanmugavel Nadai and ORs. (153 ITR 596) considered the condonation of delay and held that there was sufficient and reasonable cause on the part of the assessee for not filing the appeal within the period of limitation. Accordingly, the Madras High Court condoned nearly 21 years of delay in filing the appeal. When compared to 21 years, 195 days cannot be considered to be inordina....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... CIT(Exemptions) did not give any opportunity to the assessee by way of issuing the show cause notice which is a gross violation of principles of natural justice. 10. The ld. D.R. on the other hand, relied on the order of ld. CIT (Exemptions). 11. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. On perusal of the order of the ld. CIT (Exemptions), we find that the ld. CIT (Exemptions) himself extracted the summary of income and expenditure of the assessee trust in a tabular form for the year ended 31.03.2023 and 31.03.2024. We also observed that the assessee society have not only received the donations but also applied the donation for the object of the society. We are surprised to note that the ld. CIT (Exemptions) completely ignored these facts in holding that no donations were received and no charitable activities were carried out by the assessee trust. We are of the considered opinion that when the donations received by the trust as well as the expenditure incurred toward the object of the trust were recorded in the Books of Accounts, it is the obligation of the ld. CIT (Exemptions) to call for such documents and information from the tru....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....: Article 4 Affidavit Property Description : AFFIDAVIT Consideration Price (Rs.) : 0 (Zero) : SOCIETY OF ST VINCENT DE PAUL BONDEL : INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : SOCIETY OF ST VINCENT DE PAUL BONDEL 100 सतà¥à¤¯à¤®à¥‡à¤µ जयते LTD BONDE IL BON RS. 100 VJUN-2 926 05:24 PM RAGHANZ NOA Advocate Dist. Dakshina Kannada (Karnajak2) Please write or type below this line Reg. No 6925 25 INDIA OF BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH, BENGALURU ITA NO. 1998/Bang/2025 Sub: In the case of Society of St. Vincent De Paul Bondel, Mangalore AY : 2024 -25 AFFIDAVIT FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY OF 195 DAYS UNDER SECTION 253 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961, READ WITH SECTION 5 OF THE LIMITATION ACT Errors / Corrections Etc. - wil- Statutory Alert: 1. The authenticity of this Starp certificate should be verified ar www.choilestamp.com or using u-Stamp Mobile App of Stock Holding 2. The crus of checking aso legitimacy is on the users of the certificate. 3. In case of any discrepancy please inform the Competent Authority. SC Z I Prakash C N Pinto, son of Peter Pint....