KRANTIDEVTA SAVITRIBAI PHULE SHIKSHAN SANSTHA,KALYAN vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-(EXEMPTION), PUNE, PUNE

Ground 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax-(Exemption) erred in rejecting the application of the trust under section 12AB for registration under Section 10(23C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without providing fair opportunity of being heard as the notices were issued on incorrect email id. Krantidevta Savitribai Phule Shikshan Sansthan 3. Ground 3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, modify or delete any of the aforesaid grounds of appeal.

We have heard Ld AR and DR and examined the record. At the outset, it is pointed out by Ld. AR that the impugned order passed by Ld CIT(E) suffers from miscarriage of justice as the application has been rejected without giving proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee and no notices were issued by the Ld. CIT(E) for compliance to the assessee. Ld. AR stated that the notices issued through emails were wrongly sent at email ID ashokdsalve@gsmil.com instead of correct email ID i.e. ashokdsalve@gmail.com which is evident from page no. 16-17 of the paper book as wrong email ID whereas the correct email Id mentioned at page no. 9 and 10 of Form 10AB. Ld. AR further put reliance on the decision of Coordinate Bench of ITAT Pune in ITA No. 1029/Pun/2023 wherein the facts and circumstances are exactly similar and the Coordinate Bench has remanded the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to accord a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellant by serving notices on such registered email ID and decide the matter afresh. Krantidevta Savitribai Phule Shikshan Sansthan 6. On the other hand, Ld. DR supported the impugned order of Ld. CIT(E) and stating that the appeal is liable to be dismissed. 7. We have considered the rival submissions and examined the record. It is evident that the email address on notices issued through emails has wrongly mentioned email ID i.e. ashokdsalve@gsmil.com instead of correct email ID i.e. ashokdsalve@gmail.com which is evident from page no. 16-17 of the paper book as wrong email ID whereas the correct email Id mentioned at page no. 9 and 10 on Form 10AB. The Coordinate Bench of ITAT Pune in ITA No. 1029/Pun/2023 has decided the issue on similar facts and circumstances, the relevant finding is extracted below:- 4. Per contra, from page 5 and 10 of paper book filed by the appellant we observed that, both these former notices were sent by the Ld. CIT(E) on email-id’s which are different than the one registered with juri ictional assessing officer, as evident form page 11 of paper book. Undisputedly, the non-compliance is attributable to lack of effective notice to the appellant, thus absence of reasonable opportunity. 5. In our view in the matter of registration, a reasonable and effective opportunity to the appellant is necessary to protect against arbitrary rejection by the registering authority. This also ensures that negative observations (if any) are negated by credible evidences by the appellant. Any proceedings culminated without effective notice and opportunity would Krantidevta Savitribai Phule Shikshan Sansthan be violative of principle of natural justice, which de-facto turns the proceedings bad in law and therefore deserving to be set-aside. 6. In view of the aforestated discussion and the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in ‘Sanatan Dharm Mahaveer Dal Vs CIT’ reported in 252 ITR 46, the impugned proceedings culminated in violation of principles of natural justice are in our considered view deserves to be set- aside as contra-legem. In the event, without offering any comment on merits of the case, we deem it fit to remand the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to accord a reasonable opportunity to the appellant by serving notice/s on such registered email-id and to decide the issue of grant of 80G recognition a fresh in accordance with law, preferably in three effective hearings. 7. Resultantly, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose in above terms.

In these circumstances, respectfully following the decision of Coordinate Bench of ITAT Pune we set aside the impugned order passed by Ld. CIT(E) and restore the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication of the case of assessee after giving proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The appellant/assessee shall present its case before the Ld. CIT(E) within 90 days of this order. The impugned order is accordingly set aside. Krantidevta Savitribai Phule Shikshan Sansthan 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 17.04.2025. (OM PRAKASH KANT) (RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Mumbai / Dated 17.04.2025 Dhananjay, Sr.PS

The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //// BY ORDER