THE VAISH AGGARWAL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT (EXEMPTION), RANGE-2, NEW DELHIU

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1743/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 August 2024AY 2014-15Bench: the Tribunal and submitted at the outset that in response to notices issued by the CIT(A), the assessee has filed certain replies to support the eligibility of exemption under Section 11 of the Act. The ld. counsel adverted to the screen shots showing proof of uploading the submission on multiple occasions. However, the CIT(A) has concluded the issue against the assessee without taking such submission into account at all. The ld. counsel thus submitted that the matter may be set aside to th3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's plea, concluding that the CIT(A) failed to consider the electronic submissions and did not provide perceptible reasons for its decision. Consequently, the first appellate order was set aside, and the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh determination, ensuring proper opportunity for the assessee to adduce evidence and for the CIT(A) to pass a speaking order.

What were the facts?

The assessee, The Vaish Aggarwal Educational Society, appealed against the CIT(A)'s orders for A.Ys. 2014-15 and 2015-16, which upheld the AO's denial of exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee contended that its electronic submissions supporting the exemption were not considered by the CIT(A) and that the CIT(A)'s order lacked independent reasoning for its conclusion.

What were the issues?

Denial of exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to procedural deficiencies in the CIT(A)'s order, including non-consideration of assessee's submissions and lack of independent reasoning.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 11

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “H” DELHI

Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA & SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR

For Respondent: Shri Ramesh Chand, Sr.DR

PER SUDHIR KUMAR - J.M.: The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [‘CIT(A)’ in short] both dated 25.03.2024 and 01.04.2024 arising from the assessment orders dated 20.12.2016 and 28.11.2017 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning A.Ys. 2014-15 and 2015-16.

2.

As per the grounds of appeal, the assessee has challenged the denial of exemption claimed under Section 11 of the Act amounting to Rs.67,58,194/-.

1.

1. 3. When the matter was called for hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee, Mr. Parth Singhal referred to the paper book filed before the Tribunal and submitted at the outset that in response to notices issued by the CIT(A), the assessee has filed certain replies to support the eligibility of exemption under & 1743/Del/2024 Section 11 of the Act. The ld. counsel adverted to the screen shots showing proof of uploading the submission on multiple occasions. However, the CIT(A) has concluded the issue against the assessee without taking such submission into account at all. The ld. counsel thus submitted that the matter may be set aside to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh determination in accordance with law after giving proper opportunity to the assessee. Similar arguments were placed in respect of another appeal concerning A.Y. 2015-16.

4.

We have carefully considered the rival submissions made on behalf of the assessee and perused the first appellate order.

5.

We straightaway find merit in the plea of the assessee for two reasons;

(i) The submissions filed electronically before the CIT(A) carries no reference in the first appellate order and thus a presumption would arise that such submissions have not been taken into account at all.

(ii) The order of the CIT(A) suffers from the apparent mistake inasmuch as no perceptible reasons has been given by the CIT(A) while passing the issue against the assessee.

6.

The CIT(A) has merely adopted the reasons for denial of exemption under Section 11 by the AO. No independent application of mind to the facts is discernible from the first appellate order. Thus, the first appellate order cannot be countenanced in law for both these reasons. Hence, the first appellate order is set aside in both the captioned appeals and restored back to the jurisdiction of the CIT(A) for fresh determination of issues raised before the CIT(A) in accordance with law.

7.

Needless to say, proper opportunity shall be given to the assessee while determining the grievances raised by way of grounds of appeal. It shall be open to the assessee to adduce such evidence as may & 1743/Del/2024 be considered expedient before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) shall pass speaking order while determining the issue.

8.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order dictated and pronounced in the open Court on 28th August, 2024.

More judgments on Section 11

All 7,190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →