Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed against the CIT(E)'s order, claiming notices were not properly served or communicated, thus denying them sufficient time and opportunity of being heard. They sought condonation of a 169-day delay in filing the appeal, stating they only learned of the impugned order via phone and believed re-applying for Section 12A registration was their only remedy. The CIT(E) had rejected the assessee's application for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) on grounds of non-verification, despite the assessee's contention that notices on the ITBA portal were insufficient.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the 169-day delay, finding it reasonably explained, and admitted the appeal. It clarified that notices on the ITBA portal are insufficient and must be communicated to the assessee. Consequently, the Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(E), directing a re-examination of the issues, verification of original documents, and a decision on regular registration under Section 12A(1) after affording the assessee a proper hearing and regularizing the provisional certificate.
Key Issues
1. Condonation of delay in filing appeal due to alleged non-service and non-communication of notices. 2. Validity of CIT(E)'s rejection of Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) registration application without proper verification or opportunity of hearing.
Sections Cited
253(5), 12A, 12A(1), 12A(1)(ac)(iii)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘A’ BENCH,
Before: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA
PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:-
This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the CIT(E), Delhi dated 10.08.2023.
The solitary issue raised by the assessee is that the ld. CIT(E)
erred in not providing sufficient time to comply with the notices and not providing opportunity of being heard in person.
The representatives of both the sides were heard at length, the case records carefully perused.
The ld. counsel for the assessee has filed an application u/s 253(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act, for short] praying for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The ld. counsel for the assessee has also filed an affidavit stating that only on receiving a phone call from the CIT(E) he perused the impugned order and noticed that two notices were not served upon the assessee –company.
The assessee further stated that notices were on ITBA Portal which was not visited by him and the notices were not communicated to the assessee. He was under a bonafide belief that in the absence of tax demand, no appeal could be filed and the only remedy was to re apply for registration u/s 12A of the Act. The ld. counsel for the assessee relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Munjal BCU Center of Innovation and Entrepreneurship in which it has been held that notices appearing on portal is not sufficient and must be communicated to the assessee. Accordingly, the assessee has filed a fresh application seeking registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act.
5. The ld. DR objected to the condonation of delay.
We find that there is a delay of 169 days which stands reasonably explained. Accordingly, we condone this delay and admit the appeal.
We have carefully considered the orders of the ld. CIT(E) and have perused the documents which have been filed before us. From the affidavit it is evident that the assessee did not receive the notices issued. Provisional Registration Order dated 03.10.2023 has been furnished on record. We also find that the CIT(E) rejected the application filed by the applicant for grant of registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act on the ground that the assessee’s case could not be verified.
In that view of the matter, in the interest of justice and fair play, we restore the issues to the file of the ld. CIT(E). The assessee is directed to furnish the original documents for verification and the ld. CIT(E) is directed to examine the same and decide the issue as per the provisions of law after affording reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee for issuing regular registration u/s 12A(1) of the Act and regularize the provisional certificate.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee in is allowed for statistical purposes.
The order is pronounced in the open court on 21.08.2024.