PRIYADARSHANI SOLAR MISSION AND WATER SAVING SANSSTHAN ,JAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION), JAIPU

PDF · subscribers
ITA 314/JPR/2023Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 August 2023AY 2023-24Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that while the CIT (Exemptions) provided several opportunities, it would be in the interest of natural justice to remand the matter. The CIT (Exemptions) is directed to decide the matter afresh after giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an application for approval under section 80G(5)(iii) of the IT Act. The CIT (Exemptions) rejected the application for non-furnishing of required documents and non-compliance despite multiple opportunities. The assessee appealed, claiming a lack of adequate opportunity.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT (Exemptions) rejected the application without affording adequate opportunity of being heard, violating principles of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCH “A”, JAIPUR

Before: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM &

For Appellant: Shri Sharwan Kumar Gupta, Advocate jktLo dh vksj ls@

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT (Exemptions), Jaipur dated 16.03.2023 passed under section 80G of the I.T. Act 1961. The grounds raised by the assessee are reproduced below :-

“1. The impugned order u/s 80G(5) of the Act dated 16.03.2023 is bad in law and on facts, without providing adequate & reasonable opportunity of being heard, being without jurisdiction and for various other reasons and hence the same may kindly be quashed.

2.

The ld. CIT (E) erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in rejecting the application for grant Registration/approval u/s 80G(5) and in not granting Registration/approval. The rejection so made and refusal to grant Registration/approval u/s 80G(5) is contrary to the provisions of law and facts of the case. The same kindly be quashed.

3. That the impugned order so passed was in the contravention of the law prevalent at the relevant point of time and also on fact and hence may kindly be quashed. The ld. CIT (E) be directed to grant Registration/approval from the dated of application. 4. The Appellant prays your honors indulgences to add, amend or alter all or any of the grounds of the appeal on or before the date of hearing.

2. As to the facts of the present case, we noticed from the order of the ld. CIT (Exemptions) that the assessee applicant has filed an application in Form No. 10AB dated 30.09.2022 for seeking approval under section 80G(5)(iii) of the I.T. Act, 1961. While processing the application of the assessee, the assessee vide letter dated 02.01.2023 was required to furnish certain documents/explanations with regard to (1) Non-registration with RPT Act, 1959 and (2) Genuineness of Activities and non compliance by 17.01.2023, but no compliance was made by the assessee. A reminder letter was issued vide letter darted 19.01.2023 wherein date of hearing was fixed on 06.02.2023 but again the applicant has requested to adjourn the case and the case was adjourned to 24.02.2023. In compliance the assessee furnished its reply dated 24.02.2023, which were examined and placed on record and some discrepancies were found. Further, the case was finally adjourned to 10.03.2023 intimating it as final opportunity, but this time also the applicant has again requested to adjourn the case. The ld. CIT (E) holding that it is a limitation matter, he decided the case on the basis of material placed on record and the application of the assessee in Form 10AB for approval under section 80G was rejected for non furnishing of the required documents/information.

Now the assessee is in appeal before us.

3.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The ld. CIT (E) decided the case of the assessee ex parte by rejecting the application of the assessee in Form No. 10AB for seeking approval under section 80G(5)(iii) on the ground that neither any one appeared on behalf of the assessee on the date of hearing nor furnished the required documents/information as sought from the assessee. Before us, the grievance of the assessee was that the ld. CIT (E) without affording adequate opportunity of being heard rejected its application in Form 10AB, which is in gross breach of principles of natural justice. Before us, the ld. A/R submitted that the ld. CIT (A) decided the case of the assessee ex parte without giving reasonable opportunity of hearing. On the contrary, from the order of the ld. CIT (E), we find that the ld. CIT (E) has given as many as 4 opportunities i.e. on 02.01.2023, 19.01.2023, 07.02.2023 and 04.03.2023. However, keeping in view the circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that it will appropriate and in the interest of natural justice, to remand the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT (Exemptions) to decide the matter afresh after affording a reasonable opportunity to the assessee society to submit documents as required by the revenue authorities.

4.

Before parting, we may make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT (E) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by the ld. CIT (E) independently in accordance with law.

5.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Order pronounced in the open court on 7/08/2023.

More judgments on Section 80G

All 6,482 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →