2022 (6) TMI 1393 - AT - Income Tax

Rectification u/s 254 - registration u/s 12A - assessee filed application to CIT in Form No. 10A - assessee filed application in Form No. 10A on 31.03.2000 for grant of registration and on the basis of this application, the procedure of registration was set in motion - HELD THAT - We observe that the CIT issued certain notices to the assessee on the basis of the application dated 31.03.2000 and the assessee too complied with those notices. Realizing that no decision was coming from CIT and more particularly being aware of the fact that there was a change in jurisdiction from ITO, Ward-2 to Circle-1(1), the assessee refiled a copy of the original application alongwith documentary evidences on 07.01.2004. AR has pointed out that the filing on 07.01.2004 is a mere re-filing of documents to facilitate the registration process and there was no fresh application. We observe that the application was in fact filed on 31.03.2000 and not on 07.01.2004. We also find that it is not a case of revenue that the application dated 31.03.2000 was rejected by CIT as there is no such material produced before us. In such circumstances, therefore, there is no justification to grant registration from 01.04.2003. In fact, the CIT ought to have granted registration from 01.04.1999. Direct the CIT(E) to rectify his order and grant registration from 01.04.1999. Appeal of assessee is allowed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Grant of registration under section 12AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 from the requested date.
2. Justification of granting registration from a later date than the application date.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bhopal regarding the grant of registration under section 12AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The society, engaged in education and vocational training, applied for registration on 31.03.2000. Despite complying with various notices and submitting necessary documents, the registration was granted only from 01.04.2003 instead of the requested date of 01.04.1999. The issue was previously remanded to the Commissioner for reconsideration following an earlier decision by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal.

2. The Assessee contended that the delay in communication from the Commissioner's office led to the re-submission of documents in 2004, which was not a fresh application but a continuation of the original filing in 2000. The Assessee argued that the registration should have been granted from the initial application date. The Tribunal noted that there was no rejection of the 2000 application by the Commissioner, and the delay in processing did not justify the registration from 2003. Referring to a prior decision, the Tribunal directed the Commissioner to rectify the order and grant registration from 01.04.1999, in line with the Assessee's request.

3. The Tribunal found that the Assessee's application in 2000 initiated the registration process, and subsequent submissions were part of the same application process. The delay and lack of rejection of the initial application supported the Tribunal's decision to grant registration from the requested date of 01.04.1999. The Tribunal's direction was based on both the procedural history and the legal precedent cited by the Assessee, ultimately allowing the appeal and ordering the registration to be granted from the correct date.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues, arguments presented, and the Tribunal's decision, providing a comprehensive understanding of the legal reasoning and outcome of the case.