Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee-trust filed applications for registration under Sections 80G and 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(E) rejected these applications ex-parte for non-furnishing of requisite details, stating that notices were sent via email which the assessee failed to notice due to an employee's departure.
Held
The Tribunal held that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be given an opportunity to present its case. The impugned orders were set aside and the matter was restored to the file of the CIT(E) for fresh decision.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) was justified in rejecting the registration applications ex-parte without ensuring proper service of notice or considering the assessee's explanation for non-compliance.
Sections Cited
80G, 12A, 12A(1)(ac)(iii)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “ A ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar
O R D E R
Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:
The captioned appeals have been preferred by the assessee-trust against the separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad [hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld.CIT(E)’]. is against the order dated 15/11/2024 rejecting the application of the assessee for registration under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), whereas ITA & 166/Ahd/2025 Ashokbhai Sevantilal Patolawala Trust vs. The CIT(E)
2 No.165/Ahd/2025 is against the order dated 13/11/2024 of the Ld.CIT(E) rejecting the application of the assessee for registration under sub-clause(iii) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A of the Act.
At the outset, the Ld.Counsel for the assessee has submitted that both the applications of the assessee have been rejected by the CIT(E) for non- furnishing of requisite details as were called for by the Ld.CIT(E).
The Ld.AR for the assessee has submitted that notices of hearing requiring the assessee to furnish necessary details were sent by the Ld.CIT(E) via email. The Ld.AR has further submitted that the assessee- trust is not much conversant with the Income Tax procedure. That the concerned person, who was operating computer and checking emails etc., left the job with the assessee. Under the circumstances, the email sent by the Ld.CIT(E) did not come to the notice of the office bearers of the assessee- trust, resulting into ex-parte order of the Ld.CIT(E) in both the appeals. He therefore, submitted that assessee has a fair case on merits and that the assessee may given an opportunity to present his case before the Ld.CIT(E)
The Ld.Departmental Representative (DR), however, relied upon the findings of the Ld.CIT(E).
Considering the rival submissions, in our view, the interests of justice will be well served, if the assessee is given an opportunity to present its case before the Ld.CIT(E). In view of this, the impugned orders of the Ld.CIT(E) are hereby set aside and the matter, in both the appeals, is restored to the file of Ld.CIT(E) for decision afresh. Needless to say, that the & 166/Ahd/2025 Ashokbhai Sevantilal Patolawala Trust vs. The CIT(E)
3 Ld.CIT(E) will give proper and adequate opportunity to the assessee to present its case and thereafter to decide the same in accordance with law. It is also directed that the assessee will take due care of the notice sent by the Ld.CIT(E) on email and will promptly appear and furnish the necessary details as and when called for by the Ld.CIT(E).
With the above observations, both the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes.