Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee applied for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) and Section 80G(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The CIT(E) rejected both applications because the assessee failed to provide certain details within the stipulated time, which led the CIT(E) to conclude that the assessee could not prove the genuineness of its activities.
Held
The Tribunal perused the orders and heard submissions. While the DR supported the CIT(E)'s order, the Tribunal felt that for substantive justice, the matters should be remanded back to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication after providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) was justified in rejecting the applications for registration without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee, and whether the matters should be remanded for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
12A(1)(ac)(iii), 80G(5), 2(15)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PATNA BENCH PATNA
Before: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI
Present for: Appellant by : Shri Pawan Kumar, CA Respondent by : Sm. Rinku Singh, CIT, DR Date of Hearing : 07.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 21.05.2025 O R D E R Per Sanjay Awasthi, Accountant Member : These batch of two appeals pertain to the same assessee, since issues are inter-connected hence, they are being disposed of by this single order. it is seen that the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application filed in Form 10AB. The assessee had applied for the same for regular registration u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”). it is seen that during the course of proceedings before the Ld. CIT(E) certain details were required to be filed before him by the assessee but apparently, the same could not be filed in time. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(E) proceeded to hold that the assessee could Ld. CIT(E) for grant of registration u/s. 80G(5) of the Act. Here also, the assessee was asked to file certain details but it could not do so within the time mentioned in the opportunity provided by the ld. CIT(E). Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(E) took an adverse view of rejecting the application for grant of registration u/s. 80G(5) of the Act.
2.1. Aggrieved with the action of Ld. CIT(E), the assessee has approached the ITAT and it is seen that for both of the appeals the assessee has challenged the action of Ld. CIT(E) and has also attempted to make out a case on denial of opportunity on the basis of grounds of appeal for the two years.
We have carefully perused the impugned orders and also heard the rival submissions. Before us, the Ld. DR who has supported the order of Ld. CIT(E) in both the cases. However, it is felt that in the interest of substantive justice, both these matters deserve to be remanded back to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication, after giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. To this extent, we set aside the impugned orders in both the cases and remand the two matters to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.
In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced on 21st May, 2025.