DR. CHINNAMOULANA MEMORIAL TRUST,TRICHY vs. CIT, EXEMPTIONS,, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2384/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 November 2024Bench: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K (Vice President), SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA (Accountant Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had sought an extension of time due to the Managing Trustee's unavailability. The CIT(E) passed an ex-parte order without considering this. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to provide one more opportunity.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal is against the CIT(E)'s order dated 22.07.2024, which rejected Form No.10AB for approval under section 80G. The CIT(E) passed an ex-parte order because the assessee did not file details/documents and objections to show-cause notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) erred in passing an ex-parte order without considering the assessee's request for extension and submission of documents.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE KAND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA

Hearing: 21.11.2024Pronounced: 21.11.2024

आदेश /O R D E R

PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT:

1.

This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against CIT(E)’s order dated 22.07.2024, rejecting Form No.10AB filed for seeking approval under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’).

2. At the very outset, we notice that the CIT(E) has passed an ex-parte order. The reason for deciding the appeal ex-parte was that the assessee did not file the details/documents called for and the assessee has not filed its objections for the show-causes notices issued from the office of the CIT(E). It was submitted by the ld.AR that assessee has filed its response on 10.07.2024 seeking extension of time to file the reply citing the non-availability of the Managing Trustee of the Trust, who was not in India during the relevant period. But the CIT(E) without taking note of the same, passed ex- parte order, rejecting the application filed by the assessee for non- compliance. The ld.AR submitted that in the interest of justice and equity, one more opportunity may be provided to represent its case before the CIT(E).

3.

The ld.DR supported the order of CIT(E).

4.

We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The Office of the CIT(E) had issued show-cause notices directing the assessee to file certain details/documents. Since there was no response by the assessee to the notices issued, the CIT(E) passed ex-parte order. It is the claim of the ld.AR that assessee had submitted its response for the show-cause notice served which was not taken note by the CIT(E). In the interest of justice and equity, we are of the view that assessee ought to be provided with one more opportunity to represent its case and accordingly the issue is restored to the files of the CIT(E). The assessee is directed to co- operate with the Revenue and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. It is ordered accordingly.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 21st November, 2024 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 80G

All 6,482 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →