Loading judgment…
Facts
The appellant, Haryana Bharat Vikas Foundation, filed applications for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) and approval under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) rejected these applications without providing adequate opportunity of hearing.
Held
The Tribunal held that the CIT(E) failed to adhere to the principles of natural justice by not providing an effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The rejection of applications was therefore considered unsustainable.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) denied the assessee adequate opportunity of hearing and thus violated the principles of natural justice.
Sections Cited
12A(1)(ac)(ii), 80G, 12AB, 250(2)(a)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘E’: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN
O R D E R PER RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN , J.M. : By this common order, we propose to decide the & 7473/Del/2025 as the appellant is the same and facts are similar and accordingly in order to avoid the repetition, both the Haryana Bharat Vikas Foundation appeals are taken up together for disposal. The appeals are directed against order of the Ld. CIT(E), Chandigarh, dated 10.11.2025, wherein the application for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act, filed by the applicant on 04.09.2025 and 29.08.2025 in ITA No. 7472 & 7473/Del/2025 respectively wherein the approval u/s 80G of the Act has been rejected in the absence of registration u/s 12AB of the Act.
Aggrieved by the impugned order, the assessee is in appeal and has raised following grounds as under: - “On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh: - 1. having been passed without providing reasonable, proper and adequate opportunity of hearing: 2. rejecting the application for renewal of registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 arbitrarily is misconceived, fallacious and illegal which must be quashed with directions to grant the registration as sought.”
“On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh: - 1. having been passed without providing reasonable, proper and adequate opportunity of hearing; Haryana Bharat Vikas Foundation 2. rejecting the application for renewal of registration under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 arbitrarily is misconceived, fallacious and illegal which must be quashed with directions to grant the registration as sought.”
We have heard the ld. AR for the assessee and Ld. DR for the Revenue and examined the impugned order in both the appeals. The only contention raised before us is that the Principle of Natural Justice has not been followed while passing the impugned order as no effective opportunity of hearing has been given when rejecting the application u/s 12AB of the Act as well as u/s 80G of the Act. It is therefore prayed that matter may be restored to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for considering it afresh by giving opportunity of hearing and to permit to file necessary documents. The Ld. DR on the other hand stated that despite of numerous opportunity given by ld. CIT(E) as find mentioned in para 3.1 of the impugned orders therefore, the assessee is not entitled to any mercy due to thereon conduct and appeal is required to be dismissed.
We have considered the rival submission and examined the record, Section 250(2)(a) lays down as under: - “250(2) The following shall have the right to be heard at the hearing of the appeal- (a) the appellant, either in person or by an authorized representative;”
&7473/Del/2025 Haryana Bharat Vikas Foundation 5. Thus, the hearing mandated by Section 250(2)(a) of the Act is not a mere formality but a mandatory statutory requirement for following the principle of natural justice by the quasi-judicial authority. We extract the para 5 of the impugned order in which would make clear that the effective opportunity of hearing has not been given which is required u/s 250(2)(a) of the Act.
“5. In view of the above discussions, the present application of the applicant filed in Form 10AB u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act is disposed of as being deficient in factual evidences in the absence of the requisite submissions of the applicant at the scheduled hearings. Accordingly, the application filed by the applicant for registration/s 12AB of the Act is hereby rejected and this rejection will also supersede any registration granted u/s 12AB of the Act by any authority at any earlier time.”
In view of the above facts and circumstances, it is evident that the impugned order has been passed without effective hearing and principle of natural justice has not been followed and as a consequence the approval u/s 80G of the Act has also been denied which is subject matter of ITA No. 7473/Del/2025. For these reasons, the impugned order in both the appeals are not maintainable and accordingly set aside. The end of justice shall be met in case the matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for deciding the issue of requisite approval sought by the appellant afresh by affording an effective opportunity of hearing and considering the submissions to be made by the Haryana Bharat Vikas Foundation appellant/assessee. The assessee/appellant is also directed to make the necessary submissions/ detailed material before the Ld. CIT(E) within the period of 60 days of this order.
Both the appeals of the assessee accordingly allowed in above terms for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in open Court on 9th February, 2025