Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a religious trust, applied for permanent registration under section 12AA of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) dismissed the application, stating non-compliance with notices. The assessee contended that they had complied with most notices and the last notice was served late.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the assessee had complied with three out of four notices and the fourth notice was served after the due date. The CIT(E) had not considered the submitted documents before dismissing the application.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) erred in dismissing the application for permanent registration without considering the assessee's submissions and due to a delay in serving one of the notices.
Sections Cited
12A, 12AA
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV
PER SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER :
The present appeal of the assessee is arising from the order passed by the CIT(E), Bangalore dated 22/03/2024 in DIN No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2023-24/1063162509(1). Facts of the Case 2. The assessee is religious math/institution and serving the rich tradition of the ascetics (Virakta Sampradaya) which has come from time to time for imparting religious educations among the followers. The main object of the assessee trust is carrying on the regular periodic worship of Sri Sri Shadhkshari Shivayogi and his successor’s pontiffs. The assessee trust has got provisional registration in terms of the provision of sec. 12A of the Act in form 10C vide certificate dated 10.03.2022, valid from assessment year 2022-23 to 2024-25. The assessee applied for permanent registration vide application dated 27/09/2023. The same was dismissed by the CIT(E) on the ground that the assessee could not comply with the notices given to him and hence the assessee is not entitled for permanent registration of 12AA of the Act.
Aggrieved with the order of CIT (E), the assessee preferred the present appeal before us and contended that during the course of proceedings before CIT(A), 4 notices were given to the assessee dated 22/11/2023, 20/12/2023, 03.01.2024 and 22/02/2024.
The ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that except the notice dated 22/02/2024, the assessee has complied with all other 3 notices and has duly filed his reply on the online portal of the department. However, the ld. CIT(E) dismissed the application of the assessee in an arbitrary manner without even considering the replies of the assessee filed in respect of other 3 notices. So far as the compliance of notice dated 22/02/2024, the assessee counsel pointed out that this notice was not served in time as evident from the records of the postal authorities (placed at Page No-49 of the appeal memo) and hence the assessee could not be able to respond with respect to this notice. Finally counsel for the assessee prayed that the matter may be restored to the file of CIT(E) for examining afresh.
The ld. DR appearing on behalf of the Revenue relied upon the order of the CIT(E).
After considering the rival submission, we observe that the assessee has been served with following notices.
6.1 Thereafter, we observe that time for compliance in notice dated 22/02/2024, was upto 5/3/2024 as coming out from the notice at Page Number 48 of appeal memo. However, this notice was in fact received by assessee on 12/3/2024 as evident from the postal authorities records enclosed in appeal memo at Page Number 49 . We further observe that in response to earlier 3 notices, the assessee has duly complied with the directions of the CIT (E) and has filed voluminous documents to support his application of 12AA of the Act. However the Ld CIT(E) has not considered any of the documents before dismissing the application of the assessee. Therefore, considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the assessee deserves one more opportunity before the CIT(E). In view of this we restore the matter to the file of CIT(E) to decide the case on merits after providing reasonable . opportunity to the assessee. Hence, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed of statistical purposes.