Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an online application for registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act. Notices were issued by the CIT(E), but the assessee claims they were not received due to an incorrect email address being used, and thus could not provide explanations. The application was rejected for incompleteness and non-genuineness of activities.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee was allegedly deprived of an adequate opportunity to be heard. The bench decided not to go into the merits of the case but emphasized the imperative need for the assessee to be given a fair chance to present their case. Therefore, the matter was set aside to the file of the CIT(E) for a fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee was denied a reasonable opportunity to submit its explanation leading to the rejection of its registration application, and if the matter should be remanded for a fresh decision.
Sections Cited
12AB, Income Tax Act, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR
Before: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 277/JPR/2024
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 277/JPR/2024 cuke Aanya Foundation CIT-Exemption , Jaipur. 20-D Extension Vallabh Nagar, near Vs. Sofia School, PIP Kota, S.O. Kwshopura, Kota. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAITA7372F vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri Vijay Goyal (C.A.) jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Shri Arvind Kumar CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 24/06/2024 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement : 01 /07/2024 vkns'k@ORDER PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM
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 06.01.2024. 2. The assessee has assailed the present appeal on the following grounds:-
“1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT Exemption, Jaipur erred in rejecting the application filed by the appellant in Form 12AB for registration of trust u/s 12AB of Income Tax Act, without providing the reasonable opportunity to the assessee to submit its submission.
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT Exemption erred in holding that the assessee has filed incomplete Form No. 10AB and holding non genuine activities and further erred in rejecting the application merely on the ground non compliance made by the appellant of the notices issued by the department without providing the sufficient opportunity more so when no notice was issued by physical form.
3. The appellant prays for leave to add, to amend, to delete, or modify the all or any grounds of appeal on or before the hearing of appeal.”
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed an online application in Form No. 10AB seeking registration u/s 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by an application dated 16.07.2023. A letter/notice No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM43/2023-24/1057693348(1) dated 04.11.2023 was issued at the e- mailI’d provided in the application requiring the assessee to submit certain documents/explanations by 15.11.2023. The said notice remained non-compliant. A reminder letter was issued on 28.11.2023 and 11.12.2023 and same was also remain unattended. Thus, the assessee has not furnished any details/documents. Since it was a limitation matter, the application was decided based on material filed by the assessee along with its application in Form no. 10AB. The ld. CIT(E), in the absence of details noted that the form submitted in 10AB was incomplete, non-
Aggrieved from that finding so recorded in the order of the ld. CIT(E), the assessee has preferred the present appeal on the grounds as stated herein above in para 2. The ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee is a public charitable trust. The notices were served on which email id is served is not clear. The managing trustee’s mail id is given in the application form and she has not received any such notices. Even there is not column where the trust mail id is called for. It seems that the notices were served on the mail id of the settler of the trust, which remained non- compliant because the settler has no role to play once the trust is established. The trust has not received any physical notice also. Thus, the principles of nature justice is violated and considering the fact that the activities of the assessee trust is charitable in nature, principles of nature justice based on fact demands that once chance be given to the assessee. The ld. AR thus relied on the decision of Jaipur benches in the case of 613/JP/2023 prayed to restore the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) in the interest of justice as the order under appeal is passed ex-parte.
4 Aanya Foundation vs. CIT(E) 5. Per contra, the ld. DR relied on the orders of the ld. CIT(E) and vehemently argued that the assessee remained non-compliant and has not established the genuineness of the activity the registration has rightly been rejected.
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 groundthat form no 10AB is incomplete andnon-genuineness of activities coupled with the non-compliance of the notices so issued.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). He also submitted that in the application for registration all the details are filed. The assessee was not given proper opportunity though the managing trustee as she has not received any noticeand therefore, response could not be submitted. The Bench do not intend to go into the merit of the case or that of the dispute,but it is imperative that the assessee must be provided adequate opportunity of being heard
5 Aanya Foundation vs. CIT(E) 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). Thus, 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 and thus we set aside the issue to the file of the ld. CIT(E).
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 reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by the ld. CIT(E) independently in accordance with law.
In the result,the appeal of the assesseeis allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 01/07/2024.