AADARSH EDUCATION TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT (OSD) (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

ITA No. 2057/Ahd/2015 Aadarsh Education Trust vs. The Pr. CIT Assessment year: Block Period Page 1 of 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD [Coram: Pramod Kumar AM and S S Godara JM]

ITA No. 2057/Ahd/2015 Aadarsh Education Trust, .......…………......Appellant Haridarshan Cross Road, Naroda Road, Nikol Gam, Ahmedabad – 382 350 [PAN : AADTA 2867 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. 2057/Ahd/2015 Aadarsh Education Trust vs. The Pr. CIT Assessment year: Block Period Page 2 of 2 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 file the part details. However, details at sr. No.6,8 to 14, 19 is yet to be submitted and sought for further adjournment. Accordingly the case was refixed for hearing on 22.04.2015. 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.

Sd/- Sd/-

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