BHAROSA FOUNDATION,GURGAON-HARYANA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2688/DEL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 February 2024AY 2023-24Bench: SHRI G.S. PANNU (Vice President), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee deserved an opportunity to substantiate its claim for 80G registration. Consequently, the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, and the matter was restored to the CIT(E) for a fresh order on merits, specifically instructing to consider the issue of delay in filing the application.

What were the facts?

Bharosa Foundation, having provisional registration under Section 80G, applied for final registration. This application was rejected ex parte by the CIT(E) because notices were sent to an inactive email address, thus denying the assessee an adequate opportunity of hearing. The CIT(E) also raised concerns regarding the delay in filing the application.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex parte rejection of the final 80G registration application was valid given the lack of proper notice and opportunity of hearing, and whether the delay in filing the application should be condoned.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “A” : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI G.S. PANNU & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

Hearing: 06.02.2024Pronounced: 09.02.2024

O R D E R PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: Heard and perused the record.

2.

At the time of hearing learned AR has pointed out that the Society was incorporated on 7.4.2018 and was granted provisional registration u/s 80G from 10.3.2022 to A.Y. 2024-25 vide order dated 10.3.2022. Thereafter the Society had applied for final registration vide Form 10AB dated 17.2.2023. Learned AR submitted that no physical notice was served on the appellate society nor there was any intimation in any other form. Learned AR submitted that in September 2023 when tax audit started, it was informed by the tax auditors that the registration 4.2.2023. Learned AR has pointed out that three notices, which were issued by the learned CIT(E), Chandigarh, were on a e- mail address, which was no more in use and active for communication. Accordingly, it is submitted that assessee did not have adequate opportunity of hearing. It was further submitted that apart from the above the learned CIT(E) has also made certain observations with regard to delay in making the application. It is submitted that learned CIT(E) failed to take into consideration the settled law that delay is allowable and can be condoned.

3.

After taking into consideration all the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we are of the considered view that assessee deserves an opportunity to substantiate its claim of fulfilling the conditions of Sections 80G of the Act and entitlement of exemption by the relevant evidences to the satisfaction of the learned CIT(E). Accordingly, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes and the issue is restored on merits to the file of learned CIT(E), Chandigarh to pass a fresh order in accordance with law, especially with regard to alleged delay in filing application. Order pronounced in open court on 09.02.2024.

More judgments on Section 80G

All 6,482 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →