Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed against the CIT(E)'s order denying registration under section 80G of the Income Tax Act. The assessee argued that the notices for the proceedings were improperly served by mere uploading on the e-filing portal, which violates the procedure established under Section 282 of the Act.
Held
The Tribunal, relying on a Punjab and Haryana High Court decision, held that uploading notices on the e-filing portal without adhering to the procedure specified under Section 282(1) and Rule 127(1) does not constitute proper service. Consequently, it set aside the CIT(E)'s order and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication, directing that the assessee be granted a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
Key Issues
Whether the denial of 80G registration was valid when notices were only uploaded on the e-filing portal, without proper service as per the statutory procedure outlined in the Income Tax Act.
Sections Cited
80G, 282(1), 127(1), 12A(1)(ac)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “H” NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA
Assessee by : Sh. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate Department by : Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR : 01-04-2024 Date of hearing Date of pronouncement : 01-04-2024 O R D E R
PER N.K BILLAIYA, AM :
This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order dated 08.05.2023 by CIT (E), Chandigarh relating to the denial of registration u/s. 80G of the Act.
At the very outset the Counsel for the assessee stated that mere uploading of notice on the e-filing portal without following the procedure established u/s.282 of the Act is not a proper procedure as per law.
Strong reliance was placed on the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case of Munjal BCU Centre of Innovation and Entrepreneurship 160 taxmann.com 629.
Per contra the DR fairly conceded that the issue may be restored to the file of the CIT(E) to be decided afresh.
We have carefully considered the orders of the authorities below. There is no denying that the notices have been sent by uploading it on the e-filing portal. The Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court (supra) held as under :-
“The provisions of section 282(1) and rule 127(1) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 provides for a method and manner of service of notice and orders. [Para 7]
It is essential that before any action is taken, a communication of the notice must be in terms of the provisions as enumerated. The provisions do not mention of communication to be 'presumed by placing notice on the e-portal. A pragmatic view has to be adopted always in these circumstances. An individual or a Company is not expected to keep the e-portal of the Department open all the time so as to have knowledge of what the Department is supposed to be doing with regard to the submissions of forms etc. The principles of natural justice are inherent in the income tax provisions and the same are required to be necessarily followed [Para 8]
Having noticed as above, it is viewed that the petitioner has not been given sufficient opportunity to put up his pleas with regard to the proceedings under section 12A(1)(ac)( and as he was not served with any notice. Therefore, he would be entitled to file his reply a the Department would of course be entitled to examine the same and pass a fresh order thereafter.
In view of the above, Writ Petition is allowed and the order dated 16.1.2023 is quashed and set aside”.
Respectfully following the ratio laid-down by the Hon’ble High Court (supra) we set aside the order of CIT(E) and restore it back to his files to be decided afresh after affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 01.04.2024.