SHIVALAY NIKETAN TRUST ,HARIDWAR vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW

The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the orders impugned have been passed ex-parte, wherein Ld. CIT(E)has not verified the documents produced by the Appellant and without providing opportunity to the appellant to produce further documents and submissions, the orders impugned have been passed. Thus, sought for allowing the Appeal.

The Ld. Department's Representative vehemently submitted that the appellant has failed to substantiate the claim in support of the applications filed before the authority below, therefore, the applications have been rightly rejected which requires no interference at the hands of the Tribunal. Thus, relying on the orders of the Lower Authority, sought for dismissal of the Appeals.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It can be seen from the order impugned, the Ld. CIT (E) has rejected the applications on the ground that the applicant has failed to file documentary evidences to enable me to satisfy about the genuineness& commencement of its charitable activities and to verify these activities are in consonance with its objects. Considering the fact that the Assessee is claimed to be conducting charitable activities, the Ld. Ld. CIT(E) should have provided opportunity to the appellant to produce all the documents and should have decided the application on its merit. Thus, we set aside the impugned orders of the Ld. CIT(E) and remand the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to decide the applications afresh after providing opportunity of being heard to the Appellant. The Appellant is also at liberty to produce all the requisite documents to substantiate the claim of the Appellant.

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose.