AGATHIYAR ANNATHANA KUZHU CHARITABLE TRUST,TIRUVALLUR vs. CIT, EXEMPTIONS,, CHENNAI
आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, ‘बी’ Ûयायपीठ, चेÛनई
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Įी जॉज[ जॉज[ के, उपाÚय¢ एवं Įी अिमताभ शुला, लेखा सदèय के सम¢
BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENTAND
SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 394 & 395/CHNY/2025
M/s. Agathiyar Annathana Kuzhu
Charitable Trust,
No.2, Tagore Street, Santham Apts.,
C Block, C1, Venkateshwara Nagar,
Ambattur,
Tiruvallur – 600 053. PAN: AAITA 5102D
Vs.
The CIT(Exemptions),
Chennai.
(अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant)
(ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent)
अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri Nikhilesh, Advocate
ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri M. Rajan, CIT
सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 22.04.2025
घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025
आदेश /O R D E R
PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT:
These two appeals at the instance of the assessee are directed against two orders of CIT(Exemption), Chennai both dated
06.12.2024, rejecting Form No.10AB filed for seeking registration
ITA Nos.394 & 395/CHNY/2025
u/s.12AB and approval u/s.80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961
(hereinafter the ‘Act’).
At the very outset, we notice that the CIT(E) has passed ex-parte orders. The reason for deciding the appeals ex-parte was that the assessee did not reply to the notices issued from the office of the CIT(E). The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee is a trust and has placed on record the details of activities of the assessee’s trust. The Ld.AR further submitted that the hearing notices were uploaded only on the ITBA/e-filing portal and there was no effective service of hearing notice as per the provisions of Section 282 of the Act. It was submitted that in the interest of justice and equity, one more opportunity may be provided to the assessee to represent its cases before the CIT(E).
The Ld.DR supported the orders of CIT(E).
We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The Office of the CIT(E) had issued three notices by e-mode through ITBA/e-filing portal directing the assessee to file certain details/documents. Since there was no response by the assessee to the notices issued, the CIT(E) passed ex-parte orders. It is the ITA Nos.394 & 395/CHNY/2025
claim of the assessee that there was no effective service of hearing notice since it is only uploaded on the e-portal. We strongly deprecate the nonchalant attitude of the assessee. However, in the interest of justice and equity, we are of the view that assessee ought to be provided with one more opportunity to represent its cases and accordingly the issues are restored to the files of the CIT(E). The assessee is directed to co-operate with the Revenue and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. It is ordered accordingly.
In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 22nd April, 2025 at Chennai. (अͧमताभशुÈला)
(AMITABH SHUKLA)
लेखा सदèय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
(जॉज[ जॉज[ के)
(GEORGE GEORGE K)
उपाÚय¢ /VICE PRESIDENT
चेÛनई/Chennai,
Ǒदनांक/Dated, the 22nd April, 2025
RSR
आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/Copy to:
अपीलाथȸ/Appellant
Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत /CIT, Chennai 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध/DR 5. गाड[ फाईल/GF.