Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal challenging the order of the CIT(E) which rejected their application for registration under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(E) rejected the application without considering the submitted details and without providing an opportunity for a hearing.
Held
The Tribunal held that the interest of justice would be met by deciding the issues on merits after providing a fair opportunity of hearing to both parties. Therefore, the matter was restored back to the file of the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application for registration without considering the details submitted and without providing an opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
Sections Cited
80G, 12A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH MUMBAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR
Date of Hearing 20.02.2025 Date of Pronouncement 25.02.2025 आदेश / ORDER
PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM:
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order 23.11.2024 passed u/s 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Mumbai.
The only effective ground raised
by the assessee relates to challenging the order of Ld. CIT(E) in rejecting
2. Ideal Education Movement, Mumbai. the application for grant of registration under section 80g of the Act.
After having heard the counsels for both the parties, we found that CIT(E) has rejected the application without considering the details submitted by the assessee on 12.11.2024 in response to notice of CIT(E) exemption dated 26.10.2024 and that too without giving any opportunity of being heard in the matter. The details submitted by the assessee in this regard are available on paper book page No. 16 to 120. 3. Moreover the other reason for rejection is that the assessee had not fulfilled the stipulated conditions prescribed for filing application for approval in form 10 AB and in this regard it has been submitted by the assessee that the order does not specifically mention which conditions have not been full filled by assessee.
Be that as it may, in our view, the interest of justice would be met in case the issues / lis between the parties is decided on merits after providing fair opportunity of hearing to both the parties. Therefore, considering the above factual position, the bench feels that the ends of justice would be met only if the matter is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(E). In case proper and sufficient opportunity is not granted to the parties that in that eventuality the rights of the parties shall be prejudiced.
3 Ideal Education Movement, Mumbai.
Thus, keeping in view the above factual position, the present appeal of the assessee is restored to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for deciding it afresh on merits by providing opportunity of hearing to the parties. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and remain cooperative during the course of proceedings.
Before parting, we make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute which shall be adjudicated by the Ld.CIT(E) independently in accordance with law.
In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.