JAYAMANGALAM FOUNDATION,CHENNAI vs. CIT EXEMPTIONS, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 898/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 July 2024AY 2023-24Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, while acknowledging the assessee's negligence, granted another opportunity based on natural justice. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was restored to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee's application for approval under Section 80G(5)(ii) was rejected by the CIT(E) due to failure to provide requisite details. The assessee did not appear for the hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to provide necessary details for approval under Section 80G(5)(ii) after failing to do so initially.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G(5)(ii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” �ायपीठ चे�ई म�। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय �ी महावीर िसंह, उपा ! एवं माननीय �ी मनोज कुमार अ%वाल ,लेखा सद( के सम!। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ Jayamangalam Foundation CIT (Exemption) बनाम/ D 33, 4th Street, Anna Nagar East, Chennai. Vs. Chennai-600 102. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AACTJ-3635-Q (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (� थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : None � थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) -Ld.Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 24-06-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 03-07-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

1.

Aggrieved by rejection of an application filed in Form No.10AB seeking approval u/s 80G(5)(ii) vide impugned order dated 18.10.2023, the assessee is in further appeal before us. Upon perusal of para 5 of impugned order, it could be seen that the application has been rejected since the assessee failed to file the requisite details. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. At the time of hearing, none appeared for assessee. The Ld. CIT-DR pleaded for dismissal of the appeal.

2.

Though the assessee has remained negligent, however, keeping in mind the principle of natural justice, we deem it fit to grant another opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case. Therefore, we set aside the impugned order and restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for de novo consideration of the application after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case and supply the requisite information.

3.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 3rd July, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) उपा45 / VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद7 / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे9ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated :03-07-2024 DS आदेशकीGितिलिपअ%ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. � थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयुA/CIT Chennai. 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाडFफाईल/GF

More judgments on Section 80G(5)(ii)

All 222 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G(5)(ii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →