IDEAL EDUCATION & CHARITABLE TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT (OSD) (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2055/AHD/2015Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 October 20173 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT passed an ex-parte order without giving proper opportunity and without discussing the details furnished. The matter was restored to the CIT for passing a speaking order after giving another opportunity to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust applied for registration under Section 12AA of the Income-tax Act. The Principal Commissioner rejected the application ex-parte, stating that required details were not furnished.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of registration under Section 12AA was justified without providing adequate opportunity of hearing and proper consideration of submitted documents.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

ITA No. 2055/Ahd/2015 Ideal Education & Charitable Trust vs. The Pr. CIT Assessment year: Block Period Page 1 of 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD [Coram: Pramod Kumar AM and S S Godara JM]

ITA No. 2055/Ahd/2015

Ideal Education & Charitable Trust, .......…………......Appellant Shrusti Levis Campus, Opp. Shyamvilla Tenement, Nikol Gam, Ahmedabad-382350 [PAN : AAATI 9163 N] Vs.

Principal Commissioner of Income-tax .......................Respondent (OSD) (Exemption), Ahmedabad

Appearances by: None for the appellant Dr Banwarilal for the respondent

Date of concluding the hearing : 23.10.2017 Date of pronouncing the order : 23.10.2017

O R D E R Per Pramod Kumar, AM: 1. By way of this appeal, the assessee appellant has challenged correctness of learned CIT’s order dated 19.05.2015 rejecting assessee’s application for registration under Section 12AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the following grounds:-

“1. That the learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (OSD) (Exemption), Ahmedabad has erred in law and on the fact in rejecting our application for registration of Trust u/s 12AA of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. That the learned Commissioner has not appreciated the facts and circumstances of the case of the applicant and passed an ex-parte order without giving proper opportunity is bad in law and required to be reconsidered. 3. That the applicant has provided all the documents requires for registration of trust u/s 12AA of the I.T. Act, 1961 at the same time of application itself, but without considering the same, learned principal commissioner of income-tax (OSD) (Exemption) has rejected our application which is bad in law, illegal and required to reconsider. 4. Your applicant craves leave to add, alter, amend or delete any of the grounds till the appeal is finally heard and decided.”

ITA No. 2055/Ahd/2015 Ideal Education & Charitable Trust vs. The Pr. CIT Assessment year: Block Period Page 2 of 3

2.

On a perusal of the impugned order, it is clear that the CIT has passed the impugned order ex-parte by summarily dismissing the application on the ground that certain details requisitioned by the Commissioner were not furnished. This is evident from the following extracts from the impugned order:-

“3. In response to the aforesaid letter, the applicant trust vide its letter dated 01.01.2015 sought for an adjournment which was received in this office on 05.01.2015. Accordingly the case was adjourned. On 07.04.2015, Shri Anil Patel, CA of the applicant trust attended the office and the case was discussed with him. Further, the following details was called for from the applicant trust. 1. Complete details of the students of the school & fee structure with supporting evidence. 2. No. of students studying with their standard of fees & whether any students are admitted without charging any fee, if yes then please give supporting evidences. The case was adjourned to 22.04.2015. However, on given date, neither applicant attended the office nor furnished any details/documents nor sought any adjournment. However, on given date, neither applicant attended the office nor furnished any details/documents nor sought any adjournment.

4.

Therefore, in the absence of complete details/documents, it is not possible to satisfy about the genuineness of the activities of the above trust or the same being carried out in accordance with the objects of the trust.”

3.

There is no discussion, however, about the details actually furnished by the assessee and as to how such details were inadequate or unacceptable. In any case, the order was passed ex-parte and summarily dismissing the appeal, and the assessee’s case is that sufficient opportunity of hearing was not given.

4.

In view of the above discussions and bearing in mind entirety of the case, we are of the considered view that the matter should be restored to the file of the CIT for passing a speaking order, in accordance with the law, after giving yet another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Ordered, accordingly.

5.

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the open court today on the 23rd October, 2017.

Sd/- Sd/-

S S Godara Pramod Kumar (Judicial Member) (Accountant Member) Ahmedabad, the 23rd day of October, 2017 **bt

ITA No. 2055/Ahd/2015 Ideal Education & Charitable Trust vs. The Pr. CIT Assessment year: Block Period Page 3 of 3 Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) Commissioner (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order TRUE COPY Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad benches, Ahmedabad

1.

Date of dictation: .......two pages manuscripts of Hon’ble AM attached...23.10.2017 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member: ... 23.10.2017........ 3. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr. P.S./P.S.: .. 23.10.2017..... . 4. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for Pronouncement:… 23.10.2017... 5. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk : .. 24.10.2017.... 6. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk : ……………………………. 7. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order: ……

More judgments on Section 12AA

All 4,243 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →