St. Francis Education Society vs Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption)

ORDER

“ 1. That the Ld. CIT (E), Chandigarh has erred in law and on facts in rejecting the appellant's application for regular registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(i) of the Income tax Act, 1961 merely on considering that since activities commenced in the year of 2017, the application was required to be filed within six months from the commencement of activities which is vague and liable to be set aside.

2.

That the Ld. CIT(E) has erred in rejecting the application merely on technical basis despite of the fact findings on merits and existence of activities was afirmed as brought on record and as such the order is liable to be set aside.

3.

That the Ld. CIT(E), had gone wrong in not reviving the present application of the appellant despite of extension of the duę date by CBDT vide its Circular No. 7/2024 dated 25/04/2024 and as such the proceedings are liable to be restored.

4.

That the impugned order dated 28/04/2023 is bad in law, as the alleged delayed. filing is cured by the CBDT vide its Circular No. 7/2024 and as such the impugned application was required to be considered as filed within the time and be restored for proper adjudication.

5.

That the impugned rejection order is mechanical, harsh and disproportionate, inasmuch as rejection of registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(i) entails serious civil and financial consequences for the appellant charitable institution, therefore, the rejection order be set aside.

6.

That the impugned order is in gross violation of the principles of natural justice, as the appellant was effectively denied a meaningful and real opportunity of being heard, the notices were never brought to the knowledge of the appellant, and the rejection has been made solely on technical grounds of non-compliance not attributable to the appellant.

7.

That the present appeal has been filed within limitation from the date of acquiring President knowledge of the impugned rejection order, and without prejudice, if the limitation is computed from the date of the order, the alleged delay, if any, may kindly be condoned as the same is unintentional and occasioned due to unforeseen circumstances beyond the control of the appellant. A, separate application for condonation of delay explaining the reasons for the alleged delay is also filed herewith.

8.

That the appeal fees of Rs. 500/- had been paid vide BSR Code 0510002 Challan No. 63969 Challan dated 05/03/2026.

9.

The appeal may kindly be allowed setting aside the impugned rejection order passed by the Ld. CIT(E), Chandigarh rejecting application uls 12A(1)(ac)(ii).

That the appellant craves leave to add, amend or rescind any ground/grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.”