9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (8) TMI 377X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... epting the plea of ignorance of law on the part of the managing trustee ? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in accepting the reason given that the delay was attributable to the fact that there was no activities of the trust till March 31, 2005, overlooking the statutory provisions prescribing a time limit for filing the application for registration from the date of formation of the trust ? and 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the same managing trustee pleaded ignorance of law in filing the application of another trust of which he was the trustee seeking condonation of delay for 10 months on March 10, 1999, could again raise the same plea in the year 2007 ?" The facts in brief : The assessee is a charitable trust. In pursuance of the trust deed exe-cuted on February 14, 2000, the assessee has filed an application on April 19, 2007 in Form No. 10A seeking registration under section 12AA of the Income-tax Act. It is seen from the records that the application in Form No. 10A was actually signed by the assessee o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the trust by signing the Form under rule 10A on March 29, 2007 and thereafter, by compiling all the annexures, it was filed on April 19, 2007. However, the appellant has rejected the said contention on the ground that ignorance of law cannot be a ground for the condonation of delay and the assessee has registered a trust earlier, in which he was a trustee by name New Life World Mission Trust on May 30, 1997. It was also held that the very same chartered accountant was representing the assessee for the above mentioned trust. The contention of the assessee that he was travelling frequently was also rejected by holding that it cannot be said that the assessee was always living in abroad and inasmuch as the assessee has filed the returns for the earlier years, the assessee cannot plead his frequent trips to foreign countries as a ground for non-filing the application within the prescribed time. Being aggrieved against the order passed by the appellant, the assessee filed a further appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal, in turn, after accepting the contentions of the assessee, has allowed the appeal. The Tribunal has also taken into consideration of the letter given by the charte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under section 12AA of the Act. Therefore, when such an order is passed and when the assessee has given proper explanation for the delay in making the application, the same cannot be rejected. Learned senior counsel further submitted that when the Tribunal being the final fact finding authority has given a decision based upon facts, the same cannot be interfered with by exercising the power conferred under section 260A of the Act by this hon'ble court. In support of her contention, the learned senior counsel relied upon the following decisions : (1) Sri Vasu Pujiya Jain Derasar Pedhiv v. ITO [1991] 39 TTJ 337 (JP) ; (2) All India Primary Teachers Federation v. DIT [2004] 140 Taxman-ITAT 50 ; (3) Edith Wilkins Hope Foundation v. DIT [2008] 296 ITR (AT) 60 ; [2008] 111 ITD 97 (Kolkata) ; (4) People Education and Economic Development Society v. ITO [2008] 296 ITR (AT) 36 (Chennai) ; (5) Church of Our Lady of Grace v. CIT [2009] 34 SOT (Mum) 315 ; (6) National Law School of India University v. DIT [2009] TIOL 118 (ITAT-Bang) ; and (7) CIT v. Sanmac Motor Finance Ltd. [2010] 322 ITR 309 (Mad). Learned senior counsel also relied upon the recent decision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asonable : 1. fair, proper or moderate under the circumstances, reasonable pay. 2. According to reason, your argument is reasonable but not convincing." Therefore, what is "sufficient reason" in the proviso to section 12A is "sufficient reason", which cannot be "sufficient cause". Admittedly, in the present case on hand, the assessee has started receiving donations only after April 1, 2005. As seen from the recitals filed by the assessee as well as the letter of the chartered accountant, it is clear that there was no donation received prior to April 1, 2005, and the return was filed showing "nil" income. The assessee has offered explanation that is the reason why it was advised by the chartered accountant to file the application belatedly. It is also seen from the records that the assessee has filed the return on March 29, 2007. It also signed the application in Form 10A on March 29, 2007. However, due to the mistake of the chartered accountant, the same was presented only on April 19, 2007. Had it been filed the application on or before March 31, 2007, the assessee would have got the relief in the year 2005-06. Be that as it may, it is not in dispute that the letter of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e provisions of law. The Act presupposes an assessee to know its provisions. However, considering the facts of the case, we are of the opinion that the assessee was prevented by sufficient reason from making the application within the time prescribed. The judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the Revenue, in our considered opinion, are not applicable to the present case on hand. It is well settled principle of law that an application for condonation of delay will have to be considered on the facts of each case. We are satisfied that the order passed by the Tribunal is based upon the materials available on record, which cannot be interfered with. As contended by the learned senior counsel appearing for the assessee, the Revenue has not chosen to file appeals in cases where the Tribunal has condoned the delay of nearly forty years. Therefore, considering the abovesaid facts, we do not find any reason to interfere with the orders passed by the Tribunal. For the reasons stated above, the order passed by the Tribunal cannot be set aside and the appeal is dismissed. The substantial questions of law raised are answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
