SMT JANKI BRIJ LAL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,GURGAON, HARYANA vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS) CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 572/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025Bench: SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER | Smt. Janki Brij Lal Educational Trust, 906, Ivary Lout 3, Eseel Tower, MG Road, Gurgaon, Haryana PAN:AAUTS2289K | Vs | CIT(Exemption) Room No. 1, 5th Floor, C.R. Building, Himalaya Marg, Sector 17-E Chandigarh | |---|---|---| | **Appellant** | | **Respondent** | | Assessee by | None | |---|---| | Revenue by | Ms. Pooja Swaroop CIT(DR) | | Date of Hearing | 14/05/2025 | | Date of Pronouncement | 14/05/2025 | O4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that the CIT(E) should have provided the appellant an opportunity to produce all requisite documents and make submissions. Consequently, the tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter back to the CIT(E) for a fresh decision after ensuring the appellant is given an opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Smt. JankiBrijLal Educational Trust, appealed against the CIT(E)'s rejection of its application for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee contended that the order was passed without providing an opportunity of being heard, thereby violating principles of natural justice.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of an application for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) without providing an opportunity of being heard to the applicant violates principles of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

Before: SHRI M. BALAGANESH & SH. YOGESH KUMAR U.S.Smt.

For Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop CIT(DR)
Hearing: 14/05/2025Pronounced: 14/05/2025

Assessee by None Revenue by Ms. Pooja Swaroop CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 14/05/2025 Date of Pronouncement 14/05/2025 ORDER

PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:

1.

The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)-, Delhi (‘Ld. CIT(E)’ for short) dated 18/12/2024, wherein the application filed by the Appellant for grant of registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) has been rejected.

2.

None appeared for the Assessee. Considering the issue involved in the present appeal, we deem it fit to decide the Appeal on hearing Ld. Department's Representative and verifying the material on record. We have the Ld. Department's Representative and perused the material available on record.

3.

The grievance of the Appellant is that the order impugned has been passed without providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee, which is in violation of principals of natural justice. It can be seen from the order impugned, the Ld. CIT(E) has passed the order impugned on the ground the Assessee has not substantiated its claim by producing proper document and making submission. Considering the claim of the Assessee in the application, the Ld. CIT(E) should have provided opportunity to the appellant to produce all the requisite 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 application 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 application filed by the Appellant and also produce further documents in support of its claim.

4.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 14th May , 2025

More judgments on Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii)

All 1,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →