Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (2) TMI 343 - AT - Income TaxExemption u/s 11 - cancel the registration of trust or institution granted u/s 12A - reasons assigned for cancellation of registration are appellant society has been indulging in collection of capitation fees AND capitation fees so collected was siphoned off by the trustees for their personal benefits - whether or not the Ld. PCIT (Central), Pune is justified in cancelling the registration u/s 12A w.e.f. financial year 2007-08? - HELD THAT:- In view of concurrent findings of Tribunal and CIT(A), the Ld. PCIT was justified in reaching a conclusion that the activities of the appellant trust are not genuine and are not being carried on in accordance with the objects for which it was established. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the Ld. PCIT had rightly cancelled the registration of appellant trust. Whether or not Ld. PCIT was justified in cancelling the registration of trust with retrospective effect from financial year 2007-08? - In the present case, Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Writ Petition filed by the appellant challenging the show cause notice for cancellation of registration held that the contents of order dated 09.10.2007 passed by the Commissioner cancelling registration shall be treated as show cause notice to the appellant as extracted supra and this finding had not been reversed till date. In the interest of judicial discipline, the ld. PCIT is bound to obey the directions of Hon’ble High Court and rightly cancelled the registration w.e.f. financial year 2007-08. There is yet another reason as to why we are upholding the validity of order with retrospective effect, the appellant right from the initial date of show cause notice issued on 11.03.2011 had been representing before the learned Commissioner that the proceedings be kept in abeyance till the disposal of Writ Petition by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court and SLP by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Thus, the appellant by his acts and conduct had acquiesced to the delay in completion of proceedings. On perusal of order sheet of file of learned PCIT, it would be apparent that proceedings are continuous, merely because on change of incumbent, fresh show cause notice was issued, it cannot be construed to mean that it is fresh show cause notice especially in view of the fact that there is no evidence on record to show that earlier show cause notice was dropped. Thus, the appellant himself is responsible for delay in culminating the proceedings into the final order. Appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.
|