9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (2) TMI 802 - HC - Income TaxCondonation of delay - Tribunal declining to condone the delay of 445 days in filing the appeal against rejection order - Held that - Condonation of delay is not a matter of right. Delay can be condoned by the Tribunal only if it is satisfied that the delay has been satisfactorily explained by the appellant. Reading of the order passed by the Tribunal shows that the appellant failed in providing any satisfactory explanation for the inordinate delay of 445 days. It was, therefore, that the Tribunal rightly declined the prayer. - Decided against assessee. Registration under section 12A rejected - Retrospective registration under section 12A - Held that - We are satisfied that the Commissioner could not grant registration with retrospective effect. If that be so, the Commissioner could have granted registration only with effect from the commencement of the assessment year in which the application in question was made. Therefore, we cannot find fault with the view taken by the Commissioner or the Tribunal granting registration with effect from April 1, 2006 as there was no circumstances justifying the condonation of delay for the previous period or registration for any period prior to April 1, 2006. - Decided against assessee.
Issues:
1. Appeal for registration under section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 2. Delay in filing appeal before the Tribunal 3. Grant of registration with retrospective effect Analysis: Issue 1: Appeal for registration under section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 The Kerala Cricket Association filed appeals seeking registration under section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The appellant claimed to have made an application for registration on December 26, 1997, which was allegedly untraceable and not acted upon by the Commissioner. Subsequently, a defective application was made on March 10, 2006, which was rejected by the Commissioner. The Tribunal declined to condone the delay in filing the appeal against this rejection. Another application for registration with retrospective effect was filed on November 8, 2006, which was granted with effect from April 1, 2006. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal challenging this decision. The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, stating that the appellant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay in filing the appeal, and there were no valid circumstances for retrospective registration prior to April 1, 2006. Issue 2: Delay in filing appeal before the Tribunal The Tribunal declined to condone the delay of 445 days in filing the appeal against the rejection of the registration application. The High Court endorsed the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing that condonation of delay is not a matter of right and can only be allowed if the delay is satisfactorily explained. The Court found that the appellant failed to provide a reasonable cause for the delay, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. Issue 3: Grant of registration with retrospective effect The appellant argued that registration should have been granted with retrospective effect, considering the circumstances. However, the High Court held that in the absence of valid reasons for retrospective registration, the Commissioner rightly granted registration with effect from April 1, 2006. The Court concluded that the Commissioner could not grant registration with retrospective effect and upheld the decision to grant registration from April 1, 2006. Consequently, the appeals for registration and assessment orders for the relevant period were dismissed. In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the appeals for registration under section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and confirmed the assessment orders for the period 2001-02 to 2005-06.
|
