MIG CRICKET CLUB,MUMBAI vs. ITO(EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2701/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 December 2023AY 2015-20163 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order and restored the appeal to the CIT(A)'s file for fresh adjudication. The assessee was granted one more opportunity to present its case, in the interest of natural justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee, MIG Cricket Club, had its exemption under Section 11 rejected by the Assessing Officer. The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A) due to communication issues with its employee and a spelling mistake in its email address.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing before the CIT(A) and if a fresh opportunity should be granted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11,Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai “D” Bench, Mumbai.

Before: Justice C.V. Bhadang & Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM)

For Appellant: Shri Anil Sathe
For Respondent: Shri Sunil Mathews
Hearing: 04.12.2023Pronounced: 04.12.2023

The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 5.6.2023 passed by the learned CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi and it relates to A.Y. 2015-16.

2.

The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of the learned CIT(A) in confirming the order of the Assessing Officer, whereby he has determined the total income of the assessee at Rs. 2.43 crores rejecting the claim for exemption under section 11 of the Act.

3.

The Learned counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the assessee has been granted registration under section 12A of the Act and accordingly, it claimed exemption under section 11 of the Act in the return of income. However, the exemption so claimed was rejected by the Assessing Officer and hence the assessee filed appeal before the Ld CIT(A).

2 MIG Cricket Club

4.

However, the assessee could not appear before the learned CIT(A) for the reasons beyond its control and hence the learned CIT(A) has passed the order ex-parte confirming the assessment order. The Learned AR submitted that the assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for non-appearance before Ld CIT(A). He submitted that the assessee had given email id of its employee to the Income tax department and the said employee has left the organization. He also did not inform about the notices issued by Ld CIT(A). He submitted that the assessee has also given an alternative email id to the department, but there was a spelling mistake in it. In view of the above, the assessee was not aware of the notices issued by the learned CIT(A) and hence it could not represent before the learned CIT(A). Accordingly learned AR submitted that the assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to present its case before the learned CIT(A).

5.

We heard learned DR and perused the record. Having regard to the submissions made by learned AR, we are of the view that, in the interest of natural justice, the assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to present its case properly before the learned CIT(A). Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the learned CIT(A) and restore all the issues to his file for adjudicating them afresh, after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to fully cooperate with the learned CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of the appeal.

6.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed. Order pronounced on 4.12.2023.

More judgments on Section 11

All 7,190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →