SHANKARANANDA FOUNDATION,SAMBALPUR vs. ITO(EXEMPTIONS), SAMBALPUR

आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK श्री चन्द्र मोहन गगग, न्द्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री एऱ.ऩी.साहु, ऱेखा सदस्य के समऺ । BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JM AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, AM आयकर अऩीऱ सं./ITA No.291/CTK/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2015-2016) M/s Shankarananda Foundation Vs. ITO(Exemption), At-Prabhujee English Medium Sambalpur School, Brundaban Vihar, Sambalpur-768106 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PAN No. : AAGTS 4138 K (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri J.M.Pattnaik, AR राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 21/08/2019 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 04/09/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A), Sambalpur, dated 17.04.2018, on the following grounds :- 1. For that, the Ld CIT(A), Sambalpur has erred both on facts and law in dismissing Appeal in limine as not admitted ignoring bona fide & genuine grounds of medical emergency for which Secretary could not file Appeal in time & ignoring request for condonation of delay. 2. For that the Ld CIT(A) has erred on facts and law in not adjudicating the matter even on ex parte and throwing the assessee of his right on hyper technicality of law of limitation; 3. For that the learned CIT (A) has erred in sustaining the erroneous order of learned AO in ignoring the claim of expenditure being the institution registered u/s.12A of the I.T. Act;

2 ITA No.291/CTK/2018 4. For that any other grounds incidental to the grounds of this case may kindly be permitted to urge at the time of hearing of the case. 5. For that, any other evidences incidental to the grounds of this case may kindly be permitted to adduce at the time of hearing of the case. 2. Thereafter the assessee vide dated 18.07.2018 has filed additional ground of appeal, which reads as under :- A. For that the learned CIT (A) has failed to take note of the fact that when substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred for the other side cannot claim to have vested right in injustice being done because of non intentional/non deliberately delay. The assessee could not get opportunity to point out the same as the order was made ex parte. 3. Ld. AR, at the outset, apart from the grounds of appeal, on the basis of additional ground, submitted that the assessee could be heard by the authorities below as no opportunity of hearing has been provided either by the Assessing Officer or by the CIT(A). Therefore, ld. AR prayed for an opportunity to substantiate its claim before the AO. 4. Ld. DR submitted that the assessee does not want to pursue the appeal, therefore, the CIT(A) has rightly dismissed the appeal of the assessee for want of prosecution. Ld. DR further submitted that the assessee also did not bother to attend either before the AO or before the CIT(A), therefore, he prayed for dismissal of the appeal of the assessee. 5. After considering the rival submissions of both the parties and carefully perusing the material available on record, we find that the appeal of the assessee filed before the CIT(A) has been dismissed ex parte by the CIT(A) for want of prosecution as there was non-attendance on the part the assessee. Even in the assessment proceedings, the assessee

3 ITA No.291/CTK/2018 could not appear before the AO. However, before us, ld. AR has filed paper book containing pages 1 to 53 along with copy of the trust deed and written submissions and submitted that due to some inadvertent circumstances, as stated in the written submissions, the assessee could not appear before both the authorities below. Ld. AR also submitted that assessee is an educational institution and has been granted approval u/s.80G(5)(vi) of the Act. Therefore, prayed for one more opportunity to substantiate its clam before the AO. We, therefore, of the view that the assessee was not granted due opportunity of hearing either before the AO or before the CIT(A). Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and fair-play, there will be no loss to the Revenue if one more opportunity be granted to the assessee to represent its case before the AO. Accordingly, we restore the appeal of the assessee to the file of AO for framing de novo assessment considering submissions and documents to be produced by the assessee, after providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to appear before the AO on 09.10.2019 and cooperate with the AO in early disposal of the case. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 04/09/2019. Sd/- Sd/- (C.M.GARG) (L.P.SAHU) न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER ऱेखा सदस्य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER कटक Cuttack; ददनांक Dated 04/09/2019 प्र.कु.मम/PKM, Sr.P.S.

4 ITA No.291/CTK/2018 आदेश की प्रनिलऱपप अग्रेपषि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अऩीऱाथी / The Appellant- . 1. M/s Shankarananda Foundation At-Prabhujee English Medium School, Brundaban Vihar, Sambalpur-768106 प्रत्यथी / The Respondent- 2. ITO(Exemption), Sambalpur 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अऩीऱ) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT ववभागीय प्रयतयनधध, आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, कटक / DR, ITAT, Cuttack 5. गार्ग पाईऱ / Guard file. 6. सत्यावऩत प्रयत //True Copy// आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER,

(Senior Private Secretary) आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक / ITAT, Cuttack