9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (2) TMI 203X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8 months. Penalties under s. 273(1)(b) for both the years were levied for failure on the part of the assessee trust to comply with the relevant provisions relating to furnishing of estimate of advance-tax payable by the assessee. 3. The CIT(A) cancelled these penalties mainly on the ground that the assessee-trust had applied under s. 12A of the Act to CIT, Jodhpur/Jaipur on 27th June, 1973. This application was not disposed of for a long period of 17 years. It was ultimately disposed of on 15th Feb., 1991 by the CIT, Jodhpur refusing registration to the appellant trust. The assessee remained confident that it would be granted registration under s. 12A of the Act and, therefore, the income of the appellant trust will not be liable to any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ious trust is supposed to know the provisions relating to public charitable trust and the provisions of IT Act, so far as it relates to the trusts. He also pointed out that no mens rea is required to be established for levy of penalty under ss. 271(1)(a) and 273(1)(b). In the present case the appellant trust had consulted a tax consultant, Shri MR. Gemawat, who filed application under s. 12A as back as on 27th June, 1973. It cannot be said that the assessee was not aware of the relevant provisions of law. He thus strongly relied upon the reasons given in the penalty orders and urged that the order of the CIT(A) should be set aside and that of the AO should be restored. 6. Shri Vikas Balia, the learned Advocate, represented the respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eliberate disregard of the provisions of law. He also placed reliance on judgments reported in CIT vs. K.N. Khan Bros. (1973) 92 ITR 338 (All), CIT vs. R.K. Golecha (1988) 173 ITR 423 (Raj), 116 ITR 326 (sic), CIT vs. Rawat Singh Sons 1977 CTR (Raj) 248 : (1979) 120 ITR 65 (Raj), 196 ITR 297 (sic), CIT vs. Ajit Singh Bhagat Sing (1984) 39 CTR (Raj) 330 : (1985) 151 ITR 696 (Raj) and CIT vs. P.S. Mohideen Abdul Khader (1994) 210 ITR 735 (Mad) in support of his contention that once the CIT(A) has accepted the existence of the prima facie reasonable cause, the onus then shifted on the Revenue to establish that the defaults had occurred on account of guilty intention on the part of the assessee. The Department has not brought any such mater ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncome is required to be filed. Such a belief, though a mistaken one, may well be a bona fide belief on the facts of the present case. The large number of temples/religious trusts, under such a bona fide belief have not even applied for registration under s. 12A of the Act and have not filed their returns. Such tempies located in small cities and villages are looked after by trustees who do not have adequate knowledge and experience of dealing with taxation matters. The assessee has made a categorical statement before the authorities below that they became aware about the requirement of voluntarily filing of the returns only when they happened to meet Shri Mehta of M/s Kalani Co. CAs, Jodhpur and at his instance accounts were finalised and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
