Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, Shri Krishan Gopal Goshala Kohina, filed an online application for registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The application was rejected by the CIT(E) on the grounds of non-registration under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959, and genuineness of activities. The assessee appealed against this order.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(E) had rejected the application without providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The Bench felt that the assessee should be given another chance to present their case before the CIT(E).
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) rejected the application for registration without providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
Sections Cited
12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR
ORDER PER: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M. This appeal is filed by the assessee aggrieved from the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income (Exemption), Jaipur [herein after referred to as “ld.CIT(E)”] dated 24.03.2024. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-
“1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Id. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption) has erred in rejecting the application for registration u/s 12AB of the of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Id. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption) has erred in rejecting the Shri Krishan Gopal Goshala Kohina application on the ground that assessee is not registered under Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 while registration proceeding is pending before Assistant Commissioner DevasthanVibhag, Bikaner.
3. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law ld. CIT Exemption, Jaipur has erred on facts and in law in rejecting the application on nonsatisfaction of genuineness of the activities of the institution, despite uploading all the details as required including Registration under Rajasthan Gaushala Act.
4. The appellant hereby craves the leave to add, delete, amend or abandon any grounds of this appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the case.”
3. 1 At the outset of hearing, the Bench observed that there is delay of 01 day in filing of the appeal by the assessee for which the ld. AR of the assessee filed an application for condonation of delay with following prayers:-
“1. This Present appeal is filed on 24.05.2024 against the order passed by CIT(Exemption), Jaipur order dated 24.03.2024.
That this present appeal filed before Hon'ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench with delay of one or two days.
Further, it is submitted that the reasonable cause of delay in filing the present appeal was due to resident of rural area and unaware modern technology and not being computer and email savvy.
4. Our institution is a Gaushala. All the office bearer is honorary and no payment of work. Kindly allow the application and condone the delay of few days in the interest of justice. Kindly take the liberal view in the matter and condone the dealy.”
Shri Krishan Gopal Goshala Kohina In support of the contentions so raised the Authorized signatory filed an affidavit to support the contentions raised in the prayer for condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
3.2 The Ld. AR of the assessee appearing in this appeal submitted that the assessee is serious on the duties and the delay of 01 day is on account of due to trust employee is resident of rural area and unaware of modern technology resulted in one day in delay.Considering the various judicial precedent where in the courts has considered ignored technicality of the reasons and has considered the delay. 3.3. During the course of hearing, the ld. DR not objected to assessee’s application for condonation of delay and prayed that Court may decide the issue as deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.
3.4 We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The Bench noted that the assessee for condonation of delay of 01 day has merit and we concur with the submission of the assessee. Thus the delay of 01 day in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji and Others, 167 ITR 471 (SC) as the assessee is prevented by sufficient cause.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed online application in Form No. 10AB seeking registration u/s 12AB of the Income Tax Act, Shri Krishan Gopal Goshala Kohina 1961 on 30.09.2023. A letter/notice No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM43/2023- 24/1060184396(1) dated 29.01.2024 was issued at the e-mail/address provided in the application requiring the assessee to submit certain documents/explanations by 09.02.2024. In response to the above, the assessee furnished part reply online on 19.02.2024 which was examined. On perusal of reply furnished by the assessee few discrepancies were noticed. Thereafter, a reminder letter was issued vide notice dated 13.02.2024, but no any other details was provided by the assessee. Therefore, a show cause letter was given on 03.03.2024 fixing the case on 11.03.2024. In response to the show cause dated 03.03.2024, the assessee submitted its reply on 20.03.2024, which was also examined. Therefore, the case was decided on the basis of material filed by the assessee along with its application in Form no. 10AB and the application was rejected for registration u/s 12A vide order Din & notice No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2023-24/1052809759(1) Dated 13.05.2023 on the ground of (i) Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 (ii) Genuineness of Activities.
Aggrieved from the above order, the assessee preferred present appeal on the ground as reiterated herein below. In support of the grounds Shri Krishan Gopal Goshala Kohina so raised the ld. AR of the assessee mainly submitted that the assessee if given an opportunity will be able to satisfy the queries/ issues raised / details to be submitted and thus in the case the ld. AR of the assessee prayed that one more chance of presenting the case of the assessee be given.
Per contra, the Ld. DR relied on the orders of the Ld. CIT(E) and submitted that various opportunities were granted but the assessee has not filed details for genuineness of the activities and has not produced the registration certificate as per RPT Act.
We have heard the rival contentions and perused material available on record. The Bench noted from the order of the Ld. CIT(E) that he has rejected the application of the assessee pertaining to registration of the society u/s 12AB of the Act on the ground Non-registration of the assessee trust with RPT Act, 1959 and genuineness of activities. Before us, it is also pertinent to mention that during the course of hearing, the ld. AR of the assessee prayed that he was deprived off availing adequate opportunity of being heard by the ld. CIT(E) in the application for Shri Krishan Gopal Goshala Kohina registration/recognition. As regards the registration under RPT Act, the assessee has applied and it expected soon. We note from the records available and show cause notice were issued by the Ld. CIT(E) on 29.01.2024 and reply has been filed by the assessee on dated 19.02.2024 in response to notice dated 29.01.2024. On perusal of reply furnished by the assessee, few discrepancies were found. Further, we note that on 03.03.2024 Ld. CIT(E) has issued another notice with certain query. But the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that the assessee was aware of the 2nd notice issued by the Ld. CIT(E) and filed reply. We note that the ld. CIT(E) has passed the order on 02.024.2024 without providing adequate opportunity of hearing. The Bench does not want to go into merit of the case but it is imperative that the assessee must be provided adequate opportunity of being heard by the ld. CIT(E). In this view of the matter, the Bench feels that the assessee should be given one more chance to contest the case before the ld. CIT(E) and the assessee is directed to produce all the relevant papers concerning the application so filed before the ld. CIT(E) to settle the dispute raised hereinabove.
Before parting, we may make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) shall in no way be construed as having any In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 15/10/2024.
Sd/- Sd/- ¼ jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ ½ ¼MkWa-,l-lhrky{eh½ (RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI) (Dr. S. Seethalakshmi) ys[kk lnL; @Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 15/10/2024 *Santosh आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू The Appellant- Shri Krishan Gopal Goshala Kohina, Churu. 1. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- CIT Exemption, Jaipur. 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ The ld CIT 4. vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½@The ld CIT(A) 5. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 765/JPR/2024) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,
सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेजज. त्महपेजतंत