ARAM EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,PUDUKKOTTAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2309/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 January 2025AY 2024-25Bench: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member), SHRI JAGADISH (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed for statistical purposes

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee was not heard before the impugned order was passed, constituting a per-se violation of natural justice. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(E)'s order and restored the application back to the CIT(E) with a direction to pass a fresh order after providing an opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s.Aram Educational & Charitable Trust, applied for approval under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(E) rejected this online application ex parte, stating that the assessee had not responded to two notices. The assessee contended that they did not receive these notices in their e-mail.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of a Section 80G application without proper hearing and ensuring receipt of notices by the assessee constitutes a violation of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G(5),Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY & SHRI JAGADISH

Hearing: 20.11.2024Pronounced: 08.01.2025

आदेश / O R D E R

PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM:

1.

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), (hereinafter in short "the Ld.CIT(E)”), Chennai, dated 21.08.2024 rejecting the online application filed by the assessee on 25.03.2024 in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter in short "the Act”) seeking approval u/s.80G of the Act.

2.

At the outset, it was brought to our notice that the Ld.CIT(E) has passed an ex parte order blaming the assessee for not responding to his two (2) notices dated 26.07.2024 & 02.08.2024. It was brought to our notice that the assessee didn’t get the notices in its e-mail and therefore, prayed for one more opportunity before Ld CIT(E).

3.

Per contra, the Ld.DR doesn’t want us to give one more innings to the assessee.

4.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We note that online application filed by the assessee on 25.03.2024 in Form No.10AB was made under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act seeking approval u/s.80G of the Act which has been rejected on the ground that the assessee has not responded to his two (2) notices issued by him/Ld.CIT(E). The assessee has brought to our notice that the assessee has not received any such notices as alleged by the Ld.CIT(E). Be that as it may, since the assessee has not been heard before passing the impugned order, there is per-se violation of natural justice and therefore, we set aside the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(E) and restore the application back to his file with a direction to the Ld.CIT(E) to pass order after hearing the assessee and the Ld.AR has undertaken to appear/participate in the proceedings and the assessee’s e- (AY 2024-25) M/s.Aram Educational & Charitable Trust mail ID is contactmrandco@gmail.com, which may be taken note by the office of the Ld.CIT(E) to avoid aforesaid situation in future.

5.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 80G(5)

All 2,236 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G(5) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →