SFC RESEARCH FOUNDATION,DELHI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - EXEMPTION, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4873/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 December 2024Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(E) did not provide the assessee a proper opportunity of being heard. In the interest of justice, the appeals were remitted back to the CIT(E) with directions to grant a reasonable opportunity to the assessee and then pass a speaking order.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)'s rejection of applications under Section 12AB and Section 80G(5)(vi) of the Income Tax Act. The appellant contended that the CIT(E) did not grant proper opportunity to present the case or consider the submissions made before passing the rejection orders.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting applications under Sections 12AB and 80G(5)(vi) without providing the assessee with adequate opportunity of being heard and considering submissions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 80G(5)(vi)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘FRIDAY-G’’ : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, ACCOUTANT MEMBER

Hearing: 13.12.2024Pronounced: 13.12.2024

& 4874/Del/2024 Asstt. Years : N/A M/s SFC RESEARCH FOUNDATION vs. COMMISSIONER A-16, 1ST FLOOR, QUTAB OF INCOME TAX- INSTITUTIONAL AREA, EXEMPTION, ARUNA ASAF ALI MARG, DELHI SOUTH WEST, NEW DELHI - 67 (PAN: ABLCS5586Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Mayur Gupta, CA Respondent by : Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR. Date of Hearing 13.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement 13.12.2024 ORDER PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP These appeals have been filed by the Assessee against the rejection of application u/s. 12AB as well as rejection of application u/s. 80G(5)(vi) of the Act by the Ld. CIT(E), Delhi vide his separate orders dated 25.09.2024 respectively.

2.

When the appellant’s applications for early hearing were called out, it was submitted by the Ld. AR for the assesse that in both the appeals, Ld. CIT(E) has not granted proper opportunity to the assessee to canvass his case properly and also not considered the submissions filed by the assessee before him. Hence, he requested that the matter in both the appeals may be remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh consideration, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

3.

On the other hand, Ld. DR did not have any serious objection.

4.

After hearing both the parties and perusing the records, we are of the considered view that in the interest of justice, the matter in both the appeals needs to be remitted back to the file of the CIT(E) for fresh consideration with the directions to Ld. CIT(E) to allow the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard and thereafter pass a speaking order.

5.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in the aforesaid manner. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 13.12.2024.

More judgments on Section 12AB

All 5,972 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →