Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI B.M. BIYANI & SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI
आदेश/ O R D E R
Per Bench:
The captioned two (2) appeals, first being relating to approval u/s 80G, are filed by assessee against a consolidated order bearing DIN: ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2024-25/1071434655(1) dated 21.12.2024 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Exemption), Bhopal [“CIT(E)”] by which the assessee’s applications for grant of final registration u/s 12A & final approval u/s 80G of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the act”] have been rejected and the provisional registration u/s 12A & provisional
Shri Mewadi Bade Sath Oswal Panchayati Trust & 240/Ind/2025 approval u/s 80G granted earlier have also been cancelled. The assessee has raised the grounds as mentioned in Appeal Memos (Form No. 36).
We have heard learned Representatives of both sides and carefully perused the case record.
At first, we re-produce the impugned order passed by Ld. CIT(E):
Shri Mewadi Bade Sath Oswal Panchayati Trust & 240/Ind/2025
Ld. AR for assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) has given only two opportunities to assessee vide notices dated 24.10.2024 & 11.11.2024 by giving hearings on 08.11.2024 & 19.11.2024 respectively. While it is true that the assessee could not respond on first hearing but, however, the assessee e-filed a reply dated 20.11.2024 to CIT(E) in response to notice of second hearing, copy of e-filing acknowledgement downloaded from departmental website is filed at Pages 9-10 of Paper-Book. He submitted that the CIT(E), in first sentence of second para of impugned order, acknowledged assessee’s reply but, however, observed that the assessee did not furnish complete information as required. Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has filed a detailed Paper-Book consisting of 80 pages comprising of various documents for the examination of CIT(E) and the assessee is also ready and willing to represent its cases for full satisfaction of CIT(E).
Therefore, in the interest of justice one more opportunity must be given to assessee and these matters needs to be restored back at the level of CIT(E) for consideration afresh.
Replying to same, Ld. DR for revenue opposed the request of Ld. AR.
He submitted that the CIT(E) issued two notices and asked assessee to submit details/documents but the assessee did not furnish required details/documents and it was a failure of assessee. He submitted that the CIT(E) has a limited time to pass order within 6 months and had no option except to reject assessee’s applications when the assessee did not file the Page 3 of 5
Shri Mewadi Bade Sath Oswal Panchayati Trust & 240/Ind/2025 details/documents for satisfaction of CIT(E). He submitted that the CIT(E)’s order is perfect in the situation and must be upheld.
We have considered rival submissions of both sides and carefully perused the impugned order as well as the documents held in Paper-Book filed. After a careful consideration, we find that the CIT(E) has given only two opportunities to assessee and admittedly the assessee has filed reply to CIT(E) also which is acknowledged by CIT(E). However, the CIT(E) has considered assessee’s reply as not giving complete information and therefore rejected assessee’s applications. However, the assessee has filed a Paper- Book containing various documents for the examination of CIT(E) and also ready to make further submissions for the satisfaction of CIT(E). Therefore, in order to grant substantial justice to assessee, we agree to the request made by Ld. AR for assessee and restore these cases at the level of CIT(E) for adjudication afresh. Needless to mention that the CIT(E) shall give necessary opportunity to assessee and the assessee shall avail those opportunities and that the CIT(E) shall pass orders judiciously without being influenced by his earlier order in any manner.
Shri Mewadi Bade Sath Oswal Panchayati Trust & 240/Ind/2025
Resultantly, these appeals are allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in open court on 14/11/2025