BOL BUM SEVA SAMITI,BHUBANESWAR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), HYD, HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 234/CTK/2024Status: HeardITAT Cuttack24 July 2024AY 2025-264 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee was not provided with a proper opportunity of being heard. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the orders of the CIT(Exemptions) were set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Bol Bum Seva Samiti, applied for registration under Section 12AB and approval under Section 80G. The CIT(Exemptions) rejected both applications due to non-compliance with notices sent via email.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of registration and approval applications due to alleged non-compliance with email notices, without proper opportunity of hearing, was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,

Before: MANISH AGARWAL

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Hota
For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT, Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT DR
Hearing: 24/0Pronounced: 24/0

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MANISH AGARWAL MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & 235/CTK/20 /CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2025-2026 2026 Bol Bum Seva Samiti, Plot Bol Bum Seva Samiti, Plot Vs. CIT (Exemptions), CIT (Exemptions), No.3184, Puri By Pass Road, No.3184, Puri By Pass Road, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pandra, Bhubaneswar Pandra, Bhubaneswar PAN/GIR No PAN/GIR No.AAFTB 1022 L (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee by : Shri S.K.Hota, Adv Revenue by : Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT : Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 24/0 07/2024 Date of Pronouncement : 24/0 /07/2024 O R D E R Per Bench

CIT( ld CIT(E), Hyderabad dated 1.4.2024 rejecting the application rejecting the application for registration for registration u/s.12AB of the Act for the assessment year for the assessment year 2025-26. is an appeal filed by the assessee against the an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT( ld CIT(E), Hyderabad dated 1.4.2024 rejecting the application rejecting the application for registration for registration u/s. 80G of the Act for the assessment year for the assessment year 2025-26.

P a g e 1 | 4 & 235/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2025-2026

3.

Shri S.K. Hota, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Sanjay Kumar, ld CIT DR appeared for the revenue.

4.

It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee had filed applications for registration u/s.12AB and u/s.80G of the Act before the ld CIT(E). It was the submission that it is claimed by ld CIT(E) that notices were issued to the assessee in respect of proceedings u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act and in respect of proceedings u/s.80G(5)(iii) of the Act to produce the copy of Memorandum of Association/Trust deed for verification and to furnish a detailed reply on the specific information called for through e-mail of the assessee. It was the submission that the concerning person looking after the income tax matters of the appellant trust has inadvertently forgotten to check the e-mail, for which, the assessee could not comply with the notice issued by ld CIT(E). It was the submission that it was in this backdrop that the ld CIT(E) rejected both the application and dismissed the appeals of the assessee. Ld AR prayed that the appellant trust may be granted one more opportunity to produce the required details as called for by the ld CIT(E) for granting registration u/s.12AB and approval u/s.80G of the Act.

5.

In reply, ld CIT DR did not raise any objection to the request of ld AR of the assessee.

6.

We have considered the rival submissions. Ld CIT(Exemption), Hyderabad has rejected the applications filed by assessee for non-

P a g e 2 | 4 & 235/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2025-2026 compliance. A perusal of the impugned orders of ld CIT(E), Hyderabad clearly shows that notices were issued to the assessee through e-mail to furnish the copy of Memorandum of Association/Trust deed for verification and to furnish a detailed reply on the specific information called for. However, the appellant trust failed to furnish the same, for which, the registration u/s. 12AB as well as approval u/s.80(5)G was rejected by the ld CIT(E). It was the contention of ld AR that no notices were received by the assessee. Now, ld AR submits that the appellant trust has all the evidences as sought by ld CIT(E) and produce the same if the matter is remanded back to the file of ld CIT(E). We are of the view that proper opportunity of being heard was not provided to the assessee and hence, in the interest of justice, we set aside the orders of CIT(E) and remit the issue back to the file of the CIT(E), who will examine all the details and assessee will comply with all the requirements. In term of the above, the orders of CIT(E) are set aside and matter restored back to his file for fresh consideration of registration u/s.12AB and 80G(5) of the Act.

7.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 12AB

All 5,972 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →