Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C”, BENCH KOLKATA
Before: SHRI A.T.VARKEY, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM
आदेश / O R D E R Per A.L. Saini, AM:
The captioned appeal filed by the assessee, is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)- Kolkata passed u/s 12AA(1)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the “Act”) dated 26/02/2019.
At the time of hearing none appeared on behalf of assessee in spite of issuance of notice for hearing more than one occasion and Ld. Departmental Representative(DR), was present for the appellant Revenue. In the absence of any appearance by the assessee, the appeal is being disposed of ex parte qua the Vrindavan Charitable Trust ITA No.423/Kol/2019 assessee, after hearing Ld. DR for the Revenue on merits in terms of Rule 24 of the Income Tax Appellate, Tribunal, Rules, 1963.
At the outset itself, we note that the ld. CIT(E) has not considered the evidence and written submission made by Assessing Officer, and denied the registration u/s 12AA of the Act. The main grievance of the assessee which is mentioned in the grounds of appeal are as follows:
2. That the learned Commissioner (Exemptions) has not considered the information / evidence brought on records, while denying the registration u/s 12AA of the Act.
3. That the learned Commissioner (Exemptions) has not considered the reply to the letters dated 11.02.2019 and 19.02.2019 while the submissions reached his office on 19.02.2019 and 19.02.2019 respectively as per department online records. 4. That the learned Commissioner (Exemption) has not given opportunity of being heard as required by the Proviso to section 12AA(1)(b)(ii) before refusing to register the trust.
4. We heard ld. D.R. for the revenue and perused the material available on record. We note that the ld. CIT(E) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits based on the evidence and written submissions filed by the assessee, hence it is a violation of principle of natural justice. We note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the effected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. According to us, the ld. CIT(E) ought to have considered evidences and written submissions made by the assessee. In addition to this, the ld. CIT(E) did not adjudicate the issue on merits. Considering this factual position we are of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before ld. CIT(E). Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(E) and remit the matter Page | 2
Vrindavan Charitable Trust ITA No.423/Kol/2019 back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Court on 31.12.2019