Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL & HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘डी’’ �ायपीठ चे�ई म�। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय �ी मनोज कुमार अ�वाल ,लेखा सद� एवं माननीय �ी मनु कुमार िग�र, �ाियक सद� के सम�। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपील सं./ Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax Sri Premika Seva Samithi, (Exemption) 1152, 5th Street, Chennai 600 034. Palaniswamy Nagar, Melakaveri H.O., Kumbakonam, Thanjavur 612002. [PAN: AAABN 0049G] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� क� ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri. S.Darshan Bothra, C.A., ��यथ� क� ओर से /Respondent by : Shri. A. Sasikumar, IRS, CIT. सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 21.11.2024 घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of Pronouncement : 25.11.2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)
This appeal filed by the assessee is arising out of the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) Chennai (in short ‘’the Ld. CIT (E)’’) dated 24.07.2024.
The assessee has filed an online application on 01.02.2024 in form No.10AB u/s.12A(1) (ac) (iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( in short ‘’the Act’’) seeking registration u/s.12AB of the Act. The ld. CIT(E) on receipt of application for registration has directed the assessee to submit necessary documents to prove the genuineness of activities of the trust. Ld. CIT(E) has issued several notices, however there was no response from assessee. Hence, the ld. CIT(E) rejected the application and cancelled the registration. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before us.
Before us, ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that the ld. CIT(E) had not properly followed the principles of natural justice in true spirit. Ld. Counsel for the appellant further submitted that notice dated 05.07.2024 was issued with a direction to furnish the details by 10.07.2024, i.e within a short period of five days. Ld. Counsel prayed that if an adequate opportunity of hearing is given before the ld. CIT(E), assessee will prosecute the case properly. Per contra, the Ld. CIT-DR pleaded for dismissal of the appeal on the ground that the assessee failed to appear before the CIT(E).
We have gone through the order of CIT(E) and submissions addressed by both the parties. We are of the considered view that to meet the ends of the justice assessee should be given one more opportunity before the ld. CIT(E) since the time gap given by the ld. CIT(E) to furnish the details is only five days. Therefore, in the light of aforesaid factual position we deem it fit to set aside this appeal to the file of ld. CIT(E) for denovo adjudication of application for registration. The ld. CIT(E) who shall proceed for denovo adjudication of application in form 10AB u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act after providing proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case forthwith without any fail, failing which ld.CIT(E) shall be at liberty to proceed with the application of registration filed in form 10AB as per law.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 25th day of November, 2024 at Chennai.