9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1033X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... post has not been returned unserved and the acknowledgement due has not been received yet. In view of the above office report, service upon the respondent is deemed to be sufficient but no one has put his appearance. We have heard Shri Manish Goel, learned counsel for the Income Tax Department. The short question of law which has arisen for consideration in this appeal is:- Whether under the facts and circumstances of this case, the date of application for registration under section 12-AA of the Act would be the date on which the application was originally made i.e. 20/21.11.2000 or the date on which subsequent application/representation dated 30.09.2004 was filed? In answering the above question, it is important to narrate in brief so ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 18.11.2015. This order was challenged by the society by means of an appeal before the ITAT and it was registered as I.T.A. No. 488/Agra/2005. The above appeal and the earlier appeal I.T.A. No. 364/Agra/2004 were clubbed together and were decided vide common order dated 27.09.2007. The Tribunal ordered for setting aside the order rejecting the application filed under section 154 of the Act and directed the CIT to consider the date from which the registration of the society under the Act would be operative by a speaking order in the light of the provisions of section 12AA of the Act. The Tribunal in passing the aforesaid order had not touched the order of the CIT by which the registration was refused to the society which was subject m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ciety on 20/21.11.2000 and in the prescribed form on 15.11.2000. If this application is treated to be the application on which the registration has been granted, it may be operative from commencement of the said financial year i.e. 01.04.2000 but we are afraid to say that the registration to the society has not been granted on this application. This application stood rejected vide order dated 21.03.2002 passed by the CIT. This order to our mind has not been set aside by any authority so far. The society moved another application or representation on 30.09.2004 vide letter dated 06.08.2004 to reconsider the order dated 21.03.2002. The CIT (Appeals) without recalling or setting aside the order dated 21.03.2002 vide order dated 11.02.2005 dir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it of sections 11 and 12 of the Act available on registration would be effective from 01.04.2004 the date of the commencement of the said financial year. The date of filing the original application for registration by the society has no relevance more particularly when the said application was rejected and the proceedings has commenced de novo with the filing of another application for the registration by the society. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the substantial question of law as formulated above is answered in favour of the revenue and against the respondent society and it is held that the Tribunal is not justified in granting the benefit of registration to the society w.e.f. 01.04.2000 rather the same is admissible ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
