AASHADI KARTIKI WARI MAHAMANDAL SAMITI,JABALPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION BHOPAL, BHOPAL
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM :
This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order dated 11.07.2023 of Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Bhopal passed u/s 12AB of the Income Tax Act whereby the application of the assessee for registration u/s 12AB was rejected.
None has appeared on behalf of the assessee when this appeal was called for hearing. It transpires from the record that after filing this appeal the assessee has never appeared before this tribunal.
ITANo.343/Ind/2023 Aashadi Kartiki Wari Mahamandal Samiti The assesse has even not sought any adjournment of hearing either for today or on the earlier occasions. The assessee has filed letter dated 24.02.2024 and requested for transfer of this appeal to ITAT, Jabalpur Bench. Since the impugned order was passed by the CIT(E), Bhopal therefore, the jurisdiction to hear and decided this appeal against the impugned order lies with Indore Bench of the Tribunal. Accordingly the bench proposes to hear and disposed of this appeal ex-parte. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:
"1. The Hon.Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)Bhopal, has erred in Law and on facts, in rejecting application in form 10AB U/S 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in haste, on non submission of few requirements of the trust, by not giving proper opportunity to the appellant, thus violating the "principle of natural justice" ;despite request of adjournment by the appellant. 2. The Hon. CIT(Exemption) has erred in law, in over looking and in summarily rejecting and not considered, the tangible material already submitted during the proceedings of Provisional registration and also alongwith the application form u/s 12AB of Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The Hon.CIT (Exemption) did not consider the fact, that, out of 17 requirements, 3 were already submitted alongwith the application, while 7 others are Not Applicable, the appellant being a small society undertaking activities of religious and charitable nature and erred in rejecting the application without correlating the facts. 4. Your appellant crave, leave to add, alter, & or to amend modify substitute all or any ground of appeal before final hearing if necessity so arise."
We have heard Ld. DR who has referred to the impugned order of the CIT(E) and submitted that despite several opportunities given by the CIT(E) there was no representation on behalf of the assessee and the assessee failed to produce the requisite documents called Page 2 of 4
ITANo.343/Ind/2023 Aashadi Kartiki Wari Mahamandal Samiti for by the CIT(E) to process the application for registration and to verify the objects and activities of the assessee. Accordingly for want of requisite documents the application of the assessee could not be processed as the assessee failed to comply with the notices issued by the CIT(E) and consequently the application was rejected.
We have considered the submission of Ld. DR and careful perused the relevant record. The assessee in the grounds of appeal has challenged the impugned order on the ground that the CIT(E) has not given proper opportunity to the assessee and therefore, the impugned order was passed in violation of principle of natural justice. Further the assessee has taken a stand that out of 17 requirements three were already submitted along with application while seven others are not applicable. Thus, the assessee instead of furnishing the requisite details and documents /record has taken plea that some of the requirements are not applicable. There is no explanation on the part of the assessee about remaining 10 requirements. Further even before the Tribunal the assessee has not produced any record and even did not bother to appear and participate in the proceedings and hearing of appeal. The CIT(E) has recorded the fact that those opportunities were afforded to the assessee on 4th May 2023, 22nd May 2023 and 2nd June 2023 and thereafter the CIT(E) has rejected application of the assessee as under: “The assessee has applied for registration under the new provisions of section 12AB of the Act and three opportunity letters were also issued to the assessee and various documents Page 3 of 4
ITANo.343/Ind/2023 Aashadi Kartiki Wari Mahamandal Samiti
were called to process the application and to verify the object and activities of the assessee. In response to the letter, the assessee has not submitted the required documents. Even after providing sufficient opportunities and sufficient time the assessee has submitted only request for adjournment and required documents have not been submitted. Considering the facts of the case, it is found that the application of the assessee cannot be processed due to non compliances of the assessee, thus, the same is hereby rejected.”
Despite the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(E) rejecting application for registration the assessee has not shown any interest in prosecuting the present appeal. Accordingly in the facts and circumstances of the case we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order of the CIT(E).
In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 20.03.2024.
Sd/- Sd/- (B.M. BIYANI) (VIJAY PAL RAO) Accountant Member Judicial Member
Indore,_ 20.03.2024 Patel/Sr. PS
Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPY Sr. Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore Page 4 of 4
