Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a charitable trust running a Goshala, applied for registration under Section 12A and approval under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) rejected these applications without affording a reasonable opportunity for submissions.
Held
The Tribunal held that the assessee was not given a reasonable opportunity to present their case. Therefore, the impugned orders of the CIT(E) were set aside.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) rejected the applications for registration and approval without providing the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
Sections Cited
80G, 12AB, 12A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “F”, DELHI
Before: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY& SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA
Assessee by: Smt. Rano Jain, Advocate & Ms. Mansi Jain, Chartered Accountant Department by : Shri Parveen Rawal, Sr. DR सुनवाई क� ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 20.02.2025 घोषणा क� ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : : 20.02.2025 आदेश/ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM: These two appeals by the assessee are directed against the orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)-Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as 'the CIT(E)'), passed u/s. 80G and 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Both the impugned orders are of even date i.e. 27.09.2023.
Smt. Rano Devi, appearing on behalf of the assessee submits that the assessee is a trust registered under Trust Act. The trust is carrying out charitable cum religious activities. The assessee is running a Goshala,wherein, food and shelter is provided to approximately 60 cows. The assessee intends to expand the shelter to accommodate at least 150 cows and provide sufficient food. The CIT(E) vide impugned orders rejected assessee's applications dated 02/3/2023 for grant of registration u/s. 12A and approval u/s 80G of the Act, respectively without affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee. The assessee had furnished details before the CIT(E) and had sought time for providing further details. The CIT(E) without granting further time to the assessee vide impugned orders rejected assessee's application for grant of registration. Consequently, the application for grant of approval u/s. 80G of the Act was also rejected by the CIT(E) vide separate order of even date.
Per contra, Shri Praveen Rawal, representing the department vehemently defending the impugned orders submitted that the assessee failed to furnish necessary information asked by CIT(E). Despite affording sufficient opportunity, the assessee failed to furnish the information as sought by the CIT(E).
Both sides heard. A perusal of the orders passed by CIT(E) u/s. 12AB and 80G of the Act, respectively reveal that the CIT(E) has rejected said applications of the assessee since requisite details as asked were not furnished by the assessee. Considering entire facts of the case, we deem it appropriate to restore both these appeals back to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration of assessee's applications for grant of registration u/s. 12A of the Act and approval u/s. 80G of the Act. The & 3235/DEL/2023(AY 2024-25) CIT(E) shall pass the orders in accordance with the mandate of section 12AB of the Act, after affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee, in accordance with law.
The assessee is directed to respond to the notice(s) issued by the CIT(E) and furnish necessary details, without fail.
In the result, impugned orders are set aside and appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on Thursday the20th day of Feburary, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA) (VIKAS AWASTHY) लेखाकार सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �याियक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER िद�ी/Delhi, �दनांक/Dated 19/05/2025 NV/- �ितिलिप अ�ेिषतCopy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ�/The Appellant , 1. 2. �ितवादी/ The Respondent.