Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “ B ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH
आदेश / O R D E R
PER SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER :
The Assessee is in appeal before us against the order of Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions), Ahmedabad [‘CIT(E)’ in short] dated 15/02/2018.
2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: /Ahd/2018 V V Nagar Ayyappa Bhakta Samiti vs. CIT(E) - 2 -
1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Ahmedabad has erred in not granting exemption to the Appellant u/s.12AA of the I.T.Act, 1961 though necessary documents and information as called for, were submitted to Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) by the Appellant.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee, in the present case, had applied for registration of trust u/s.12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) before the ld.CIT(E), Ahmedabad, however the said application for registration u/s.12AA of the Act was rejected by the CIT(E), Ahmedabad by holding that assessee failed to file documentary evidences to enable him to bring satisfaction about the genuineness of the assessee-trust activities.
The Ld.AR submitted before us that assessee had already submitted all the required documents which were not considered by ld.CIT(E). It was submitted that assessee is entitled for registration u/s.12AA of the Act on the basis of its objects, without any activity having been undertaken and relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Ananda Social & Educational Trust vs. CIT reported at (2020) 114 taxmann.com 693 (SC) wherein it was held as under: “Section 12AA provides for registration of a trust. Such registration can be applied for by a trust which has been in existence for some time and also by a newly registered trust. There is no stipulation that trust should have already been in existence and should have undertaken any activities before making application for registration. /Ahd/2018 V V Nagar Ayyappa Bhakta Samiti vs. CIT(E)
Since section 12AA pertains to registration of Trust and not to assess of what a trust has actually done, it is viewed that term ‘activities’ in provision includes ‘proposed activities’. That is to say, a Commissioner is bound to consider whether objects of Trust are genuinely charitable in nature and whether activities which Trust proposed to carry on are genuine in sense that they are in line with objects of Trust.”
4.1. The Ld.AR also submitted by way of paper-book the details of the copies of application/copy of notice/copy of letter which were filed before CIT(E) as per particulars shown below: Sl.No. Particulars Page(s) in paper- Filed before book 1. Copy of application dated 1 to 60 Assessing Officer 10/08/2017 addressed to the Income Tax (HQ), (Exemption), Ahmedabad along with Trust deed and their enclosures.
Copy of application dated 61 to 94 CIT 08.10.2017 addressed to Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemption), Ahmedabad along with enclosures 3. Copy of notice dated 01/01/2018 95 - from the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemption), Ahmedabad 4. Copy of letter dated 22/01/2018 96 & 97 CIT addressed to Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemption), Ahmedabad
On the contrary, Ld.DR relied upon the order passed by Ld.CIT(E). /Ahd/2018 V V Nagar Ayyappa Bhakta Samiti vs. CIT(E) - 4 - 6. After hearing both the parties at length, we found that assessee could not appear before ld.CIT(E) when the case was called for and in the absence of the assessee, the Ld.CIT(E) while relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Dawoodi Bohara Jamat (Civil Appeal No.2492 of 2014) had decided the application for registration of Trust u/s.12AA of the Act filed by the assessee.
Be that as it may, after considering the rival submissions, we are of the view that matter requires reconsideration at the level of Ld.CIT(E). Since according to assessee, the assessee had already submitted the required documents before Ld.CIT(E), but the same do not find mention in the order. Therefore, it can be inferred that those documents filed by the assessee were not considered. The principle of audi alteram partem is the basic concept of natural justice. The expression “audi alteram partem” implies that a person must be given an opportunity to defend himself. This principle is sine qua non of every civilized society. The right to notice, right to present case and evidence, right to rebut adverse evidence, right to cross examination, right to legal representation, disclosure of evidence to party, report of enquiry to be shown to the other party and reasoned decisions or speaking orders. We took this guidance for right of hearing, from the ratio as is laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, wherein /Ahd/2018 V V Nagar Ayyappa Bhakta Samiti vs. CIT(E) - 5 - Hon'ble Supreme Court has laid down that rule of fair hearing is necessary before passing any order. We find that it is pre-decision hearing standard of norm of rule of audi alteram partem. We are, therefore, of the view that matter requires reconsideration at the level of Ld.CIT(E). Thus, while setting aside the order of Ld.CIT(E), we restore it back to Ld.CIT(E) and direct that all the documents filed by the assessee be considered and assessee be given one more opportunity of being heard and to file any other documents before the Ld.CIT(E), Ahmedabad as called for and the Ld.CIT(E) is also directed to decide the application for registration filed by the assessee, keeping in view the principles laid down in the aforesaid judgements while passing a fresh order, if the assessee wants to submit any document, he is at liberty to submit before the ld.CIT(E). Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is set aside to the file of ld.CIT(E) for statistical purposes.