HARI KIRTAN DARBAR TRUST,MUMBAI vs. CIT EXEMPTION , PUNE

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "E" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Assessment Year: 2022-23) Hari Kirtan Darbar Trust, Section– 17, Ulhasnagar - 421003 [PAN: AAATH1502L] …………… Appellant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs (Exemption), Pune, Room No. 322, 3rd Floor, Income Tax Office, PMT Building, Shankar Seth Road, Pune - 411037 ……………. Respondent Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : None For the Respondent/Department : Shri Biswanath Das Date Conclusion of hearing : 11.10.2023 Pronouncement of order : 19.10.2023

O R D E R Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member: By way of the present appeal the Assessee has challenged the order, 1. dated 25/03/2023, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune [hereinafter referred to as ‘the CIT(E)’] rejecting application No. CIT Exemption PUNE/2022-23/12AA/12886 filed by the Appellant/Assessee under Section 80G(5) of the Act.

The Appellant has raised following grounds of appeal: 2.

1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax-Exemption, Pune has erred in rejecting the application filed by the appellant Trust for grant of (Assessment Year: 2022-23) exemption u/s 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

2. On the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax-Exemption, Pune has ignored the evidences of activities undertaken placed on his record without assigning any proper reason.” The relevant facts in brief are that the Appellant is a Trust duly 3. registered under Section 12A of the Act with effect from 14/03/1984. The Trust was granted exemption under Section 80G (5) of the Act from 29/12/2015 (till withdrawn). As per Finance Act, 2020 with effect from 01/04/2021, all the existing entities having approval under Section 80G(5) of the Act were required to apply for a fresh approval before 1st April, 2021. The Appellant-Trust also applied for the provisional registration under Section 80G(5) of the Act on 28/03/2022 and was granted provisional approval for the period from 05/04/2022 to Assessment Year 2024-2025 (i.e. upto 31/03/2024).

4. However, vide order dated 25/03/2023 the CIT(E) rejected the application filed by the Appellant on 28/09/2022 for seeking registration to under Section 80G(5)of the Act resulting in rejection of the provisional approval leading to the filing of the present appeal by the Appellant-Trust.

5. When the appeal was taken up for hearing, none was present for the Assessee. However, on perusal of the order impugned, we find that the application filed by the Assessee for grant of exemption under Section 80G(5) of the Act was rejected in view of the fact that the Appellant had failed to provide relevant documents/details asked for vide notice through ITBA Portal on 29/11/2022 and 08/12/2022. Since, the Assessee had failed to respond to both the aforesaid notices, the CIT(E) proceeded to reject the application after considering the material on his record. The Appellant is now in (Assessment Year: 2022-23) appeal before us challenging the order passed by the CIT(E). In view of the fact that the Appellant Trust was earlier granted registration under Section 80G(5) of the Act and taking note of the fact that the Appellant has been proceeded ex-parte since the Appellant had failed to respond to two notices issued within a period of 10 days, we deem it appropriate to set aside the order, dated 25/03/2023, passed by the CIT(E) and resorted the registration application back to the file of CIT(E) for fresh adjudication after giving the Assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard and to present its case. The Assessee is directed to co-operate in the proceedings and submit all the relevant documents/details before the CIT(E) on receipt of notice of hearing. In case there has been any change of address, communication address, email etc., the Appellant-Trust is directed to take necessary steps to bring the same on record in proceedings before the CIT(E). In terms of the above, Ground No. 1 raised by the Appellant-Trust in the present appeal is allowed for statistical purposes while Ground No. 2 is dismissed as being infructuous.

In result, the present appeal preferred by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 19.10.2023.