Loading judgment…
Facts
The Assessee filed applications for registration under Section 12AA and Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which were rejected by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) ('Ld. CIT(E)'). The Assessee contended that the rejection orders were passed ex-parte without notice or opportunity to produce documents. The appeals were filed with a delay of 160 days, which the Tribunal condoned.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the applications without providing an opportunity to the Assessee to produce documents. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders and remanded the matter back to the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh consideration after granting the Assessee a proper opportunity of being heard.
Key Issues
Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) was justified in rejecting applications for registration under Section 12AA and Section 80G without providing the Assessee a proper opportunity of being heard or verifying documents.
Sections Cited
12AA, 80G
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI
Before: SHRI M. BALAGANESH & SH. YOGESH KUMAR U.S.
Assessee by Sh. S. K. Bansal, CA Revenue by Ms. PoojaSwaroop CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 14/05/2025 Date of Pronouncement 14/05/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: These two present appeals are filed by the Assessee against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)-, Chandigarh (‘Ld. CIT(E)’ for short) dated 27/02/2024 wherein the application filed by the Assessee for grant of registration u/s 12AA and 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) has been rejected.
There is a delay of 160 days in filing the present Appeals. The Assessee filed application for condonation of delay contending that since the order of the Ld. CIT(E) is ex-pate and the order impugned have not been served on the Assessee and the Appeal could not be filed on time.
Thus, sought for condoning the delay. For the reason stated in the application for condonation of delay, the delay in filing the captioned Appeals are condoned.
The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the orders impugned have been passed ex-parte, wherein Ld. CIT(E)has not served the notice to the Assessee and without verifying the documents produced by the Appellant and without providing opportunity to the appellant to produce further documents and submissions, the orders impugned has been passed, thus, sought for allowing the Appeal.
The Ld. Department's Representative vehemently submitted that the appellant has failed to substantiate the claim in support of the applications filed by the Appellant. Thus, relying on the orders of the Lower Authority, sought for dismissal of the Appeals.
We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record. It can be seen from the order impugned, the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application for want of documents to substantiate the claim of the Appellant. Considering the fact that the Assessee is claimed to be conducting charitable activities, should have provided opportunity to the appellant to produce the documents and should have decided the application on its merit. Thus, we set aside the impugned orders of the Ld. CIT(E) and remand the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to decide the applications afresh after providing opportunity of being heard to the Appellant. The Appellant is also at liberty to cure/comply any technical objections if any in the applications filed by the Appellant and also produce further documents in support of its claim.
In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 14th May , 2025