BADI SADRI JAIN CHARITABLE TRUST,UDAIPUR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 359/JODH/2018Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur07 May 2019AY 2018-193 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(Exemptions) passed the order ex-parte without substantiating the service of the last opportunity letter. Therefore, principles of natural justice were violated.

What were the facts?

The assessee applied for registration under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(Exemptions) rejected the application for non-compliance with requests for documents and verification of the Trust Deed, despite granting further opportunities.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of the registration application by the CIT(Exemptions) was justified without providing a proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR

Before: SHRI N.K.SAINI & SHRI A.T. VARKEY

For Respondent: DR Shri Mahesh Gehlot, Advocate
Hearing: 07.05.2019

Per N.K. SAINI, V.P. : This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 14.5.2018 of the CIT(Exemptions), Jaipur.

2.

The only grievance of the assessee in this appeal relates to the rejection of application moved by the assessee for granting registration u/s 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act').

3.

Facts of the case in brief are that the assessee filed an application

on 9.11.2017 in form No. 10A seeking registration u/s 12AA of the Act.

The Ld. CIT(E) observed that the assessee was asked to submit certain

documents / explanations by 6.3.2018 and also to produce original

Trust Deed / MOA for verification but no compliance was made. He also mentioned that one more opportunity was granted vide letter dated

20.4.

2018 but there was no compliance, therefore, the Ld. CIT(E)

rejected the application moved by the assessee.

4.

Now the assessee is in appeal.

5.

The Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that no proper

opportunity of being heard was provided by the Ld. CIT(E), therefore,

the action of Ld. CIT(E) in rejecting the applications moved by the assessee for registration u/s 12AA of the Act was not justified.

6.

In his rival submissions, the Ld. Sr.DR supported the impugned

orders passed by the Ld. CIT(A).

7.

We have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. In the present case, it is not in dispute that the Ld. CIT(E) passed the impugned order ex-parte. He

mentioned that one more opportunity was provided vide letter dated

20.4.

2018, however, nothing is brought on record to substantiate that the said letter was served upon the assessee. It is well settled that nobody should be condemned unheard as per the maxim “audi alteram partem”. We, therefore, by keeping in view the principles of natural justice, deem it appropriate to set aside this case back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) to be adjudicated afresh in accordance with law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

8.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. (Order Pronounced in the Court on 07.05.2019) (A.T. VARKEY) Vice President Dated : 07.05.2019 “आर.के.” आदेशक"""त"ल"पअ"े"षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ"/ The Appellant

2.

""यथ"/ The Respondent 3. आयकरआयु"त/ CIT 4. आयकरआयु"त (अपील)/ The CIT(A)

5.

"वभागीय""त"न"ध, आयकरअपील यआ"धकरण, च#डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, Jodhpur 6. गाड&फाईल/ Guard File

आदेशानुसार/ By order सहायकपंजीकार/

More judgments on Section 12AA

All 4,243 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AA →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →