THE JEEVAN SANDHYA FOUNDATION,GHAZIABAD vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW

PDF · subscribers
ITA 929/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 December 20182 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(Exemption) had not decided the applications on merits and had not passed a speaking order. Therefore, the matter was sent back to the CIT(Exemption) for a fresh decision after giving the assessee an opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee's application for registration under Section 12AA was rejected by the CIT(Exemption) twice. The first rejection was for non-appearance, and the second was on the grounds that there was no change in circumstances and the previous order was not challenged.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of the application for registration under Section 12AA without a speaking order and without deciding on merits is valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

Hearing: 31.12.2018Pronounced: 31.12.2018

ORDER Per L.P. Sahu, A.M.: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the ld. CIT (Exemption), Lucknow dated 07.01.2016, challenging the rejection of application filed by assessee u/s. 12AA of the IT Act, as per the grounds taken in this appeal.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee moved an application for registration u/s. 12AA on 24.01.2015 which was rejected by the ld. CIT(Exemption) for non-appearance on behalf of the assessee. Subsequently, the assessee again filed fresh application u/s. 12AA on 22.07.2015 which was stated to have been received in the office of CIT(E) on 30.11.2015. The ld.

CIT(E), however, rejected this application too on the ground that there is no change in the facts and circumstances and that the assessee has not challenged the earlier rejection order before the ITAT. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the assessee is in appeal before us.

3.

We have heard the submissions of both the parties and have gone through the entire material available on record and we find that the ld. CIT(Exemption) has not decided any of the applications of assessee on merits. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the reasons given by the ld. CIT(Exemption) for rejection of assessee’s second application do not appear tenable. It is noteworthy that the ld. CIT(Exemption) has not passed any speaking order on the application of assessee. He has not even addressed as to what were the objects and activities of the assessee-trust before denying registration to the assessee. Therefore, for want of speaking order, we think it appropriate to send the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for deciding the issue afresh by way of speaking order in accordance with law after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the ld. CIT(E) and shall put up its case before him for getting the issue decided. Accordingly, the appeal deserves to be allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 12AA

All 4,243 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →