THE HUBLI DHARWAD OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGICAL SOCIETY,HUBLI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3126/BANG/2018Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 June 2019AY 2016-173 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee did not receive a proper opportunity to be heard by the CIT(E) before the rejection order was passed. Therefore, the order of the CIT(E) was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee society applied for registration under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act for charitable purposes. The CIT(E) rejected the application, alleging the society's benefits were not available to the public at large and its membership was not open to the public.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity of being heard by the CIT(E) before the rejection of its registration application.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN & SHRI B.R. BASKARAN

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar, CIT
Hearing: 12.06.2019Pronounced: 14.06.2019

Date of hearing : 12.06.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 14.06.2019 O R D E R

Per N.V. Vasudevan, Vice President

1.

This appeal by the assessee is against the order dated 26.9.2018 of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions), Bangalore [CIT(E)] rejecting the application filed by the assessee for grant of registration u/s. 12AA of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”].

2.

The assessee filed an application for grant of registration u/s. 12AA of the Act on 27.3.2018. It is the claim of assessee that it was existing for charitable object of medical relief and it was entitled to registration. The CIDT(E) addressed a letter dated 6.9.18 calling upon the assessee to show cause as to why the assessee cannot be regarded as existing for non-charitable purpose, because benefits of the society were not available to public at large. The CIT(E) was also of the view that membership of assessee society was not open to public. The hearing was fixed by the CIT(E) on 17.9.18.

3.

The aforesaid notice of CIT(E) was received in the Karnataka Medical Institute, Admin. Section on 7.9.18 because the assessee’s society address was a room in the aforesaid medical institute. The letter was delivered to the assessee only on 28.9.18. Immediately on 29.9.2018, the assessee wrote a letter to the CIT(E) for an opportunity to reply to his show cause notice dated 6.9.2018. But the CIT(E) passed the impugned order on 17.9.18 which was the ate on which the notice dated 6.9.18 was delivered to the assessee. In the aforesaid circumstances, we are of the view that the assessee did not have a proper opportunity of being heard before the CIT(E). We therefore set aside the order of CIT(E) and restore the question of grant of registration to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration in accordance with law, after affording the assessee opportunity of being heard.

4.

In the result, the appeal of assessee is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

Pronounced in the open court on this 14th day of June, 2019.

More judgments on Section 12AA

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →