Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an application for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(vi)-ITEM(B) of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) rejected the application after the assessee failed to provide explanations for discrepancies raised in the notices, and also failed to appear for a hearing.
Held
The Tribunal restored the matter to the file of the CIT(E) to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case and decided the issue after giving due opportunity of hearing.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) was justified in rejecting the registration application without providing a proper opportunity for the assessee to explain discrepancies, and whether the matter should be remanded for fresh consideration.
Sections Cited
12A(1)(ac)(vi)-ITEM(B), 11
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, PUNE
Before: SHRI R.K. PANDA & MS. ASTHA CHANDRA
The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20.09.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune [“CIT(E)”] whereby he rejected the application of the assessee filed before him on 30.03.2024 in Form No. 10AB u/s 12A(1)(ac)(vi)-ITEM(B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”).
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :-
1. The Id CIT Exemption erred in law and on facts in rejection of application for registration u/s 12AB without considering the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. The appellant prays for opportunity so as to explain its case.
3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify or substitute any ground of appeal at the time of hearing.”
Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on perusal of the assessee’s application for registration along with annexures thereto, with a view to verify the genuineness of activities of the assessee trust and 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, the Ld. CIT(E) issued a notice through ITBA portal on 27.05.2024, which was duly served via e-portal and email, requesting the assessee to upload certain information/clarification by 11.06.2024. The assessee sought adjournment which was granted upto 17.07.2024 vide notice dated 10.07.2024. On verification of the details and documents submitted by the assessee, the Ld. CIT(E) noticed various discrepancies which were communicated to the assessee vide notice dated 09.09.2024 asking the assessee to show cause as to why the application for regular registration should not be rejected and why the provisional registration granted to the assessee should not be cancelled. The said show cause notice was duly served upon the assessee through e-portal and email and the compliance was sought by 16.09.2024. However, the assessee neither submitted any explanation nor availed the opportunity of hearing granted by the Ld. CIT(E). In the absence of any explanation to the discrepancies communicated to the assessee, the Ld. CIT(E) presumed that the assessee has nothing to say in the matter. Without prejudice to the above, the Ld. CIT(E) further observed that as per financial statements and ITRs furnished by the assessee, the trust has claimed deduction under section 11 of the Act. Therefore, the said provisions of section 12A(1)(ac)(vi)(B) are not applicable in assessee’s case. Therefore, he rejected the application for registration filed by the assessee.
Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and all the grounds of appeal relate thereto.
The Ld. AR submitted that the initial notice issued by the Ld. CIT(E) was compiled by the assessee. However, the subsequent notice listing out the discrepancies could not be complied with due to certain unavoidable circumstances. The Ld. AR submitted that assessee has a strong case on merits of registration and given an opportunity the assessee’s case can be explained to the satisfaction of the Ld. CIT(E) by filing the relevant details / documents and clarifying the discrepancies noticed by him. The Ld. AR therefore prayed that the matter be set aside to Ld. CIT(E) for fresh consideration of assessee’s application for registration.
The Ld. DR had no objection to the above request of the Ld. AR.
We have heard the Ld. Representatives of the parties and perused the material available on record. We observe that the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application of the assessee for want of any explanation offered by the assessee to the discrepancies noticed by him. Only two notices were issued by the Ld. CIT(E) out of which one remained un-complied by the assessee. Before us, the Ld. AR has pleaded for one more opportunity to explain its case before the Ld. CIT(A). Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case before him by filing the requisite details and decide the issue as per fact and law after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to make its submissions before the Ld. CIT(E) on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which the Ld. CIT(E) shall be 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, the appeal of assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 25th February, 2025.