Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed applications for registration under sections 80G and 12A of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) issued notices for discrepancies but the assessee did not respond adequately, leading to rejection. There was also a delay in filing the appeals before the Tribunal.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals. Considering the interests of justice, the matter was restored to the CIT(E) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to present its case, deciding thereafter as per facts and law.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee was denied a reasonable opportunity of being heard by the CIT(E) before rejecting the applications for registration under sections 80G and 12A, and whether the delay in filing appeals should be condoned.
Sections Cited
80G, 12A, 12AB, 12(A)(1)(ac)(iii)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & MS. ASTHA CHANDRA
O R D E R PER BENCH : These two appeal filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemption), Pune rejecting the application for grant of registration u/s.80G and 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) respectively. For the sake of convenience, these two appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
There is a delay of 60 days in filing of these appeals, for which the assessee has filed a condonation application along with an Affidavit explaining the reasons for such delay. After considering the contents of the condonation application filed along with the Affidavit explaining the reasons for such delay and after hearing the ld.DR, the delay in filing of both appeals by the assessee are condoned and the appeals are admitted for adjudication.
has raised the following grounds of appeal :
1. The Ld.Assessing Officer has erred in law and in fact in rejecting the application filed u/s 80G of the Act without providing an opportunity of being heard in the matter due to technical error.
2. The appellant craves leaves to add or amend any ground of appeal
.” 2.2 The assessee in has raised the following grounds of appeal :
1. The Ld.Assessing Officer has erred in law and in fact in rejecting the application filed u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act without providing an opportunity of being heard in the matter due to technical error.
2. The appellant craves leaves to add or amend any ground of appeal.”
3. Facts of the case in brief, are that the assessee filed an application in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of section 12(A)(1)(ac) of the Act. In order to verify the genuineness of the activities of the assessee and in compliance to requirements of any other law for the time being in force by the trust / institution as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects, a notice was issued through ITBA Portal requesting the assessee to upload certain information / clarification. The assessee in response to the same filed certain details. On perusal of the those details, the ld.CIT(E) found certain discrepancies for which he issued another notice asking the assessee to explain by calling for certain other details. Since the assessee did not furnish any explanation to the discrepancies communicated, the ld.CIT(E) presumed that assessee has nothing to say in the matter. He, therefore, rejected the application filed by the assessee for grant of registration under section 12A of the Act and also cancelled the provisional registration granted earlier under section 12AB of the Act.
Since the application for grant of registration under section 12A was denied, he rejected the application for grant of approval under section 80G of the Act also.
Aggrieved with such order of CIT(Exemption), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.
The ld.Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that the ld.CIT(E) has given only two notices and due to certain unavoidable circumstances, assessee could not furnish any reply to the discrepancies communicated to it. The ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be given an opportunity to substantiate its case by filing the requisite details to the satisfaction of the Ld. CIT(E). He, accordingly, submitted that the matter may be restored to the file of ld.CIT(E).
The Ld. DR on the other hand strongly opposed the arguments advanced by the ld.Counsel for the assessee. He submitted that adequate opportunities were accorded by the ld.CIT(E), but the assessee did not avail the same. Therefore, the order of the ld.CIT(E) be upheld and the grounds raised by the assessee should be dismissed.
We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides and perused the material available on record. We find that after the assessee filed certain details in response to the notice issued by ld.CIT(E), certain discrepancies were noticed by him for which he issued another notice asking the assessee to make its submission clarifying the discrepancies. However, the assessee did not respond to the notice issued by the ld.CIT(E) for which, he rejected the application for grant of registration under section 12A of the Act and also cancelled the provisional registration granted earlier under section 12AB of the Act. Since he rejected the application for grant of registration under section 12A, he also rejected the application for grant of approval under section 80G of the Act. It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that given an opportunity, the assessee is in a position to substantiate its case before the ld.CIT(E) by filing the requisite details as called-for by him. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the ld.CIT(E) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case by filing the requisite details to his satisfaction and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also hereby directed to submit the details as called for by the ld.CIT(E) on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which the CIT(E) is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 4th March, 2025.