THE R.H.PATUCK INSTITUTE FOR PARSEES,MUMBAI vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTIONS),MUMBAI, MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the assessee deserved one effective opportunity to present its case. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside, and the matter was restored to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee's application under the Income-tax Act was rejected by the CIT(Exemption). The assessee argued that the rejection occurred without an adequate opportunity for hearing and was willing to provide necessary documents.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity of hearing before the rejection of its application.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Not specified
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH
आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned order dated 01.03.2026 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Mumbai, whereby the assessee’s application under the relevant provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961 has been rejected.
2 ITA No.6595/Mum/2026 Bhagnari Panchayat Trust
Before us, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the facts involved in the present appeal are identical to those in the batch of appeals decided by us today, wherein the applications were rejected without granting an adequate and effective opportunity of hearing. It was submitted that the assessee is ready and willing to furnish all the requisite documents and explanations if one more opportunity is granted. The learned Departmental Representative fairly left the matter to the discretion of the Bench.
We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of substantial justice, we are of the opinion that the assessee deserves one effective opportunity to substantiate its claim before the learned CIT(E). Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of the learned CIT(E) with a direction to adjudicate the assessee’s application afresh in accordance with law after affording due and effective opportunity of hearing. The assessee shall extend full cooperation in the proceedings and furnish all the documents and information as may be required by the learned CIT(E).
3 ITA No.6595/Mum/2026 Bhagnari Panchayat Trust
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 10th July, 2026.
Sd/- Sd/- (ARUN KHODPIA) (AMIT SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated 10/07/2026 KARUNA, sr.ps
Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //True Copy//
BY ORDER,
(Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Rentex Polymers Private Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxDelhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Shila Traders vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Ashish Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner Gsto Ward No. 86Delhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bhanwal Trading And Company vs. The Union Of INDIARajasthan · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Saraswati Enterprises vs. State Of RajasthanRajasthan · 28 Oct 2026