INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 253

Appeal (Tribunal) - Condonation of delay of 442 days - Negligence on the part of assessee for not taking necessary steps for filing the appeal within the limitation period -

This appeal by assessee was directed against the order of CIT(E) passed under section 12AA(1)(b), whereby CIT(E) granted registration under section 12A with effect from 1-4-2017 as against the registration sought by the assessee with retrospective effect from 31-12-2005. There was delay of 442 days in filing the present appeal, assessee had filed an application for condonation of delay. Assessee submitted that assessee-university was established under Rajasthan Technical University Act, 2006 and that assessee was illegible for exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiab). But, after notification by CBDT with reference to rule 2BBB, it was advised that for abundant caution, University should apply for registration under section 12AA with effect from its date of incorporation. Accordingly, assessee submitted an application in Form 10A for registration under section 12A on 26-5-2017 and sought registration with retrospective from 31-12-2005. CIT(E) granted registration with effect from 1-4-2017 i.e. 1st day of the financial year in which application was submitted. Delay in filing the appeal was on account of non-realization of impact for the period for which the registration was not granted. Held: The negligence on the part of the assessee for not taking necessary steps for filing the appeal within the limitation period provided by statute cannot be considered as a reasonable or sufficient cause. Even the assessee is very casual in explaining the reasons in the application of condonation of delay which was not supported by an affidavit. In absence of any detail as to what steps the assessee took to reach to the decision of challenging the order and filing the present appeal and why the assessee has not filed the present appeal as soon as possible even after expiry of limitation period. The explanation for delay of 442 days was insufficient, unsatisfactory and unreasonable. Accordingly, application for condonation of delay was dismissed and consequently the appeal of the assessee was not maintainable being barred by limitation.

REFERRED : Visvesvaraya Technological University v. Asstt. CIT (2016) 384 ITR 37 (SC) : 2016 TaxPub(DT) 1933 (SC).

FAVOUR : Against the assessee.

A.Y. :

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT