Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “B” :: PUNE
Before: SHRI S.S.GODARA & DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE
ORDER
PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:
This appeal filed electronically i.e.E-filed and all documents on system.
1.1 This is an appeal against the order under section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 28.10.2022 passed by the ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemption). The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : Udayagiri Laprosy Eradication and Rehabilitation Sanstha [A] “1. BREACH OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE 1.1 The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune [“the Ld. CIT(E)”] erred in passing the order rejecting the application made in Form 10AB under section 12A( 1 )(ac)(iii) and cancelling provisional registration by not granting proper, sufficient and adequate opportunity of being heard to the Appellant while framing assessment.
1.2 While doing so, the Ld. CIT(E) failed to appreciate that as per the principles of natural justice, providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee is mandatory before passing the adverse order.
1.3 In the above circumstances, it is humbly prayed to set aside the order passed by the CIT(E).
ERRED IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION IN FORM 10AB 2.1 The Ld. CIT(E) erred in not granting the regular registration u/s 12A / 12AB of the Income - tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’] and cancelling the provisional registration vide order dated 28.10.2022.
2.2 While doing so, the Ld. CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application by doubting the genuineness of the activities of the appellant and compliance to requirements of any other law.
2.3 In the above circumstances, the Appellant prays to set aside the order rejecting the application under Form 10AB and cancelling the provisional registration and it further prayed to grant regular Udayagiri Laprosy Eradication and Rehabilitation Sanstha [A] registration for five years.
3. LIBERTY The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, delete or substitute any of the above ground of appeal.”
Submission of ld.AR : 2. At the outset, ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) of the assessee submitted that there was a delay in filing appeal . The ld.AR invited our attention to the affidavit filed by the assessee.
On perusal of the affidavit, we are of the opinion that there was reasonable cause for delay in filing of appeal. Therefore, the delay is condoned.
On perusal of the order of ld.CIT(E), it is observed that ld.CIT(E) has rejected assessee’s application for registration under section 12AA of the Act stating that no details were filed by the assessee as were called-for by the ld.Commissioner. However, it is observed that only one opportunity was granted by the ld.CIT(E). It is an admitted fact that the Trust is registered under Bombay Trust Act, 1950 for more than 20 years. However, the ld.CIT(E) has not commented anything about the objects of the Trust whether they are charitable as defined in section 2(15) of the Act. The Udayagiri Laprosy Eradication and Rehabilitation Sanstha [A] ld.CIT(E) has also not commented about the activities carried out by the assessee. In these facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that no proper opportunity was granted to the assessee to represent his case. Hence, we set-aside the order of ld.CIT(E) for denovo adjudication. Accordingly, grounds of appeal are allowed for statistical purpose.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13th February, 2024.