BANKEY BEHARI CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS - WARD 1(1), MUMBAI

Before us, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT(E) rejected both the applications after granting only one opportunity of hearing and proceeded to decide the matters ex parte. It was submitted that the assessee could not furnish the requisite details within the stipulated time and, therefore, prayed that one more effective opportunity be granted by restoring the matters to the file of the learned CIT(E). The learned Departmental Representative fairly left the issue to the discretion of the Bench.

We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the impugned orders have been passed ex parte after granting only one opportunity to the assessee. In our considered opinion, before rejecting applications seeking registration under section 12AB and approval under section 80G, the assessee should be afforded an effective and meaningful opportunity to place all the relevant documents and explanations on record. Since such opportunity was not effectively available in the present case, we deem it appropriate, in the interest of substantial

Accordingly, we set aside the impugned orders and restore both the matters to the file of the learned CIT(E) with a direction to adjudicate the applications afresh in accordance with law after affording due and effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee shall also extend full cooperation in the proceedings and furnish all such documents and information as may be required by the learned CIT(E).

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.