SWAMI VIVEKANANDA SEVA KENDRA,KANCHIPURAM vs. CIT, EXEMPTION,, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2472/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 November 20243 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be given one more opportunity before the Ld. CIT(E) to file necessary documents and prosecute its case. The Tribunal acknowledged that the assessee had not filed the requisite response within the time frame requested by the Ld. CIT(E) due to the Managing Trustee's social service activities and sudden ill health. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(E) and remanded the appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for denovo adjudication of the application in Form No. 10AB under Section 10(23C)(iii) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(E) was directed to provide a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee, who was also directed to substantiate its case forthwith without fail. The Ld. CIT(E) was granted liberty to proceed as per law if the assessee failed to comply. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Swami Vivekananda Seva Kendra, filed an online application in Form No. 10AB on 02.01.2024, seeking approval under Section 10(23C)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai (CIT(E)), directed the assessee to submit documents to prove the genuineness of its activities. Despite several notices, the assessee did not respond. Consequently, the CIT(E) rejected the application. The assessee appealed this order to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The appeal was heard on 21.11.2024 and pronounced on 25.11.2024.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Ld. CIT(E) properly followed the principles of natural justice in rejecting the assessee's application for approval under Section 10(23C)(iii) of the Act, considering the assessee's failure to respond to notices. Assessee's Contentions: The Ld. Counsel for the appellant argued that the Ld. CIT(E) had not properly followed the principles of natural justice. The assessee prayed for an adequate opportunity of hearing before the Ld. CIT(E) to prosecute the case properly, attributing the lack of response to the Managing Trustee's involvement in social service activities and sudden ill health. Revenue's Contentions: The Ld. CIT-DR pleaded for the dismissal of the appeal on the ground that the assessee failed to appear before the CIT(E).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

10(23C)(iii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL & HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI

Hearing: 21.11.2024

[PAN: AAHTS 5543F] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� क� ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri. R.S. Balaji, Advocate ��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 22.07.2024.

2.

The assessee has filed an online application on 02.01.2024 in form No.10AB under clause (iii) to first proviso to Section 10(23C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘’the Act’’) seeking approval u/s.10(23C) (iii) of the Act. The ld. CIT( E) on receipt of application 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. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before us.

3.

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 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).

4.

We have gone through the order of CIT(E) and submissions addressed by both the parties. We are of the considered view that in the interest of justice assessee should be given one more opportunity before the ld. CIT(E) to file necessary documents and prosecute its case. We are also conscious of the fact that the assessee has not filed the requisite response within the time frame as asked by the ld. CIT(E) as the Managing Trustee was actively involved in social service activities and also due to sudden ill health. 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 seeking approval u/s.10(23C) (iii) of the Act. The ld. CIT(E) who shall proceed for denovo adjudication of application in form No.10AB under clause (iii) to first proviso to Section 10(23C) 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 filed in form 10AB as per law.

5.

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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →