DEVNARYAN GAUSHALA SAMITI ,BEAWAR KHAS vs. CIT EXEMPTION, EXEMPTION

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” 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, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 70/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2024-25 cuke Devnarayan Gaushala Samiti, CIT Vs. Beawar Khas VIA Beawar Exemption, District Ajmer, Ajmer Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABTD 5800 G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Mukesh Agarwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Ajay Malik (CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 07/03/2024 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 29/04/2024 vkns'k@ ORDER

PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM

The present appeal arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Jaipur dated 13/12/2023 [here in after (ld. CIT(E)] vide which the registration of the assessee trust under section 12AB was rejected. While rejecting the application the ld. CIT(E) noted that the application of the assessee was not complete, assessee has not submitted the registration certificate under Rajasthan Public Trust Act and non- compliance on the part of the assessee and therefore, the ld.CIT(E) could

2 ITA No. 70/JP/2024 Devnarayan Gaushala Samiti vs. CIT, Exemption not see the genuineness of the Activities of the trust. Against this decision

of the ld. CIT(E) the present appeal of the assessee.

“1. That the ld. CIT is not justified in law and on facts of the case in rejecting the registration granted u/s 12AB without affording sufficient and proper opportunity. 2. That the ld. CIT is grossly erred in law and on facts of the case in rejecting the registration granted u/s 12AB while deciding on the application for approval u/s 80G and treating the assessee as of foreign.”

assessee is a society registered with Registrar of Societies, Ajmer under

Rajasthan Societies Registration Act, 1958 since 1/11/2002 vide

Registration No. 119/Ajmer/2002-03. That the assessee is registered with

Directorate of Gau Sewa, Pashu Palan Vibhag, Rajasthan, Jaipur under

Rajasthan Gaushala Act, 1960 since 13/06/2014 too. That the assessee

was provisionally registered u/s 12A(1)(ac)(vi) on 27/1/2023 for period of

AY 2023-24 to 2025-26 by PCIT, CPC.

12AB by referring assessee’s so called application for approval u/s 80G

and treating the assessee as Foreign as given in his addresses in the

3 ITA No. 70/JP/2024 Devnarayan Gaushala Samiti vs. CIT, Exemption order. The ld. CIT(E) also noted that the assessee was given three

opportunities, but the assessee has not complied and thus in the absence

of the requisite details the ld. CIT(E) could not verify the genuineness of the

activities carried out by the assessee and based on that set of facts the

application for registration u/s. 12AB was rejected based on the fact that

the application of the assessee was not complete, assessee has not

submitted the registration certificate under Rajasthan Public Trust Act and

non-compliance on the part of the assessee and therefore, the ld. CIT(E)

could not verify the genuineness of the Activities of the trust. The relevant

finding of the ld. CIT(E) is reiterated here in below :

“However, the application has failed to comply with the letters, despite being given three opportunities details of which given in para-1. In the absence of such details, it could not be determined whether the applicant is genuinely carrying out charitable activity as per its objects. Therefore, the application’s claim of registration u/s 12AB is also liable to be rejected on ground of not proving its genuineness of activity. 05. In view of above discussion assessee’s claim of registration section 12AB is liable to be rejected and thus being rejected on following grounds:- • Incomplete Form 10AB • Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959. • Genuineness of Activities & Non-compliance.”

grounds as reiterated here in above para 2. To support the various grounds

so raised the ld. AR appearing on behalf of the assessee has placed their

written submission which is kept on record. The ld. AR of the assessee

4 ITA No. 70/JP/2024 Devnarayan Gaushala Samiti vs. CIT, Exemption mainly contended that the Id. CIT(E) reported to have issued notices online

on email address to aadts6780q@gmail.com which does not belong to the

assessee but belongs to his previous AR. (paper book page no. 22) and

there was not copy served to the assessee. The assessee in support of this

contention filed an affidavit of his authorized representative submitting that

the ld. AR due to his personal occupation in the CMA exam he did not find

attention and in turn could not inform the assessee also. In support of the

contentions so raised in the written submission reliance was placed on the

following evidence / records:

Dated Authority PAGE s No PARTICULARS before/by NO. whom it was filed/issued

1-14 1 Registered Constitution with Registrar of Societies Ajmer CIT(E 1/11/200 CIT(Exempti 15 2 Registration Certificate 2 on 13/6/2014 3 Registration with Directorate of Gau Sewa, Pashu Palan 16 Vibhag Rajasthan, Jaipur 27/1/23 Online 4 Form 10AC for registration u/s.12A 17-18 27/1/23 Online 5 Form 10AC for Approval u/s.80G(4) 19-20 20/12/22 21 6 Notice of Devsthan Vibhag for 27/2/2023 Online 22 7 Site print out of.Email Address where notice sent 23/1/24 8 Affidavit of Previous AR 23-24

submitted that the assessee was given sufficient time of submitting the

5 ITA No. 70/JP/2024 Devnarayan Gaushala Samiti vs. CIT, Exemption details on three occasion but the assessee miserably failed to support the

requirement of registration and therefore, ld. CIT(E) has rightly rejected the

claim of the assessee for registration and therefore, the assessee do not

deserves any relief.

on record. It is not disputed that there notices were issued to the assessee

but the same was on the address given by the ld. AR of the assessee. The

ld. AR of the assessee filed the proof that he was issued the notice and CC

was not marked to any other email id of the assessee. The ld. AR of the

assessee submitted that as he was preoccupied for his CMA exam he could

not inform or reply the issue of the notice. The content of the facts filed on

affidavit suggest that the for the negligent act of the ld. AR of the assessee,

the assessee should not suffer. The assessee by filling the affidavit of the

ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the burden of non-compliance has

valid reason the assessee is deprived of the natural justice before the ld.

CIT(E). Thus, on careful consideration of the facts of the case available on

record we are of the considered view that the assessee is deprived of the

justice and therefore, we are of the view that the assessee in the interest of

principles of natural justice be given an opportunity of being heard by the ld.

6 ITA No. 70/JP/2024 Devnarayan Gaushala Samiti vs. CIT, Exemption CIT(E) based on the peculiar set of circumstances argument by the ld. AR

of the assessee. Therefore, we see no harm in providing one more

opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In case, however, if the

assessee even in this remand proceeding does not fully cooperate in

expeditious disposal of remanded proceedings, learned CIT(E) will be at

liberty to take such action as deems fit and proper and judicious. The matter

is thus restored to the file of the learned CIT(E) for adjudication de novo

after affording yet another opportunity of hearing to the assessee, by way of

a speaking order, and in accordance with the law. Ordered, accordingly.

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

purposes in the terms of observations as indicated above.

Order pronounced in the open court on 29/04/2024.

Sd/- Sd/- ¼ Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh ½ ¼ jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ ½ (Dr. S. Seethalakshmi) (Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai) U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 29/04/2024 *Ganesh Kumar, PS आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू 1. The Appellant- Devnarayan Gaushala, Ajmer izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- CIT (Exemption), Jaipur 2. vk;dj vk;qDr@ The ld CIT 3.

7 ITA No. 70/JP/2024 Devnarayan Gaushala Samiti vs. CIT, Exemption 4. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The ld CIT(A) 5. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 70/JP/2024) 6.

vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत