Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's applications for registration under Section 12AB and Section 80G of the Income Tax Act were rejected by the Ld. CIT(E) without providing an opportunity for the assessee to be heard. The notices were allegedly uploaded on the portal but not properly served.
Held
The Tribunal held that the rejection of applications without affording the assessee an opportunity of being heard violated principles of natural justice. Therefore, the case was remitted back to the Ld. CIT(E) to provide a hearing on merit.
Key Issues
Whether the rejection of registration applications under Section 12AB and Section 80G without proper notice and opportunity of being heard violates the principles of natural justice.
Sections Cited
12AB, 80G
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN
(Assessment Year: 2024-25) Baba Banda Bahadur Jan Sewa Samiti, vs. CIT (Exemption), Tikana, Baba Banda Bahadur, Chandigarh. Sant Nagar, Hisar – 125 001 (Haryana). (PAN : AAEAB2011R) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 13.05.2025 Date of Order : 13.05.2025 O R D E R
PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The assessee has filed appeals against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(E)”, for short] dated 26.09.2024 & 11.12.2024 for the AY 2024-25.
At the time of hearing, ld. AR for the assessee brought to our notice that the ld. CIT (E) has rejected the application for registration u/s 12AB of Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) without giving any opportunity of being heard to the assessee and is against the principles of natural justice inasmuch as the notices stated to be issued on 09.08.2024, 22.08.2024 and 30.08.2024 to the assessee were merely uploaded on the income tax portal, but were not delivered by post or transmitted through electronic mail or electronic mail message at the address of the assessee and hence, these notices were not validly served on the assessee. Accordingly, He prayed that this issue may be remitted back to the ld. CIT(E) with the prayer to give an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Similarly, the application filed for registration u/s 80G was also rejected in absence of registration u/s 12AB of the Act.
On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue objected to the submissions of the ld. counsel for the assessee and relied on the order of Ld. CIT (E).
Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We observed that the assessee submitted the ld. CIT (E) rejected the application for registration u/s 12AB of the Act without giving any opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In our considered view and in the interest of justice, assessee should be given one more opportunity of being heard on merit. Therefore, we direct ld. CIT (E) to give an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and decide the issue on merit as per law. We also direct assessee to make proper submissions and appear before the ld.CIT (E) on the date of hearing and cooperate with the tax authorities. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Similarly, the registration u/s 80G was also rejected on the same ground. The assessee is in appeal before us by filing separate appeals vide . We remit this issue also back to the file of ld. CIT (E) in the interest of justice. Both the issues under consideration may be decided as per law.
In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 13TH day of May, 2025 after the conclusion of the hearing.