Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an application for registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(E) directed the assessee to submit documents, issued notices, but received no response, leading to rejection of the application. The assessee appealed this rejection.
Held
The Tribunal acknowledged that the assessee's President was on a foreign trip, which could explain the lack of response. The Tribunal held that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be given another opportunity to file necessary documents and present their case.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) properly followed principles of natural justice in rejecting the registration application without proper opportunity for the assessee to respond due to extenuating circumstances.
Sections Cited
12A(1)(ac)(iii), 12AB
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
Selva Sri Krishna Seva Sabha, Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax Plot No.56, Krishnan Koil Street, (Exemption) Thiru Nagar, Chennai. Valasaravakkam, Chennai 600 087. [PAN: ABITS 0189J] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� क� ओर से/ Appellant by : Smt R. Lalitha, C.A., ��यथ� क� ओर से /Respondent by : Shri A. Sasikumar, IRS, CIT. सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 20.11.2024 घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of Pronouncement : 21.11.2024 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 21.08. 2024.
The assessee has filed an online application on 08.03.2024 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 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 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 as asked by the ld. CIT(E) as the President of the Trust has gone to foreign trip for his personal reasons. 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 21st day of November, 2024 at Chennai.