SHREE SAURASHTRA KADWA PATEL SAMAJ,PUNE vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE, PUNE

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1419/PUN/2023 Shree Saurashtra Kadwa Patel Vs. CIT Exemption, Pune. Samaj, Sr.No.3/1, H.No.1 to 4/1/1/1, Nr. IOC, Abmbegaon BK Petrol Pump, Pune- 411046. PAN : AAITS2593N Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Smt. Deepa Khare Revenue by : Shri Ajay Kumar Kesari Date of hearing 11.01.2024 : Date of pronouncement : 11.01.2024 आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This appeal is filed by the assessee directed against the order passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption, Pune [‘the CIT, Exemption’] dated 01.11.2023 passed u/s 12AB r.w.s. 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’). 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is a charitable society registered under the provisions of Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. It is formed with the objects of Navratri Function, Sports Activity, Makar Sankranti, Education Excellency Award and Cultural Programs etc. The appellant society had applied for grant

2 ITA No.1419/PUN/2023 of registration u/s 12AB r.w.s. 12A of the Act in Form 10A on 25.03.2023. Thereafter, the appellant society had applied for grant of registration in Form 10AB on 10.05.2023. On receipt of the said application, the ld. CIT, Exemption had called for certain details vide letter dated 09.08.2023. The said letter was duly complied with by the appellant society. However, the ld. CIT, Exemption had sought further information issued notice on 20.10.2023 requiring the appellant society to comply with the said notice on or before 25.10.2023. The appellant society sought further time to comply with the said notice. The ld. CIT, Exemption without disposing of the adjournment petition had proceeded with disposal of the application for grant of registration. In the circumstances, the ld. CIT, Exemption had rejected the application filed by the appellant society had also cancelled the provisional registration granted on 01.04.2023. 3. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal. 4. The ld. AR submits that the appellant could not comply with the notice dated 20.10.2023 for want of reasonable time and, therefore, prayed that the matter be remanded to the ld. CIT, Exemption for de novo consideration.

3 ITA No.1419/PUN/2023 5. On the other hand, ld. CIT-DR objects to remand the proceedings for the reasons that the appellant trust could not comply with the notice of hearing dated 20.10.2023. 6. We heard the rival submissions and perused the materiel on record. On mere perusal of the impugned order, it would be clear that the ld. CIT, Exemption had rejected the application for grant of registration solely on the ground that the appellant society could not respond to the notice of hearing dated 20.10.2023. We also note that the hearing notice dated 20.10.2023 was required to be complied with on or before 25.10.2023, which means the appellant society was given merely 5 days to respond to the hearing notice, which is unreasonable short period of time. The Standard Operative Procedure (‘SOP’) issued by the CBDT dated 19.11.2020, wherein, minimum period of 15 days is required to be given to the assessee to comply with notices u/s 142(1) from the date of issue of the notice. Recently, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Dauphin Travel Marketing Private Limited vs. ITO in W.P.(C) 8870/2023 & CM Nos.33516-17/2023 dated 05.07.2023 taking note of this SOP held that the grant of insufficient time to respond the notice violates the principles of natural justice and, therefore, set-aside the assessment. Thus, it is clear that the appellant was given unreasonably short period of time to respond to the notice, which is

4 ITA No.1419/PUN/2023 against the principles of natural justice. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT, Exemption is in violation of principles of natural justice by giving unreasonable short period of time to respond the hearing notice. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that it is most appropriate to set-aside the impugned order and remand the proceedings to the ld. CIT, Exemption for de novo disposal of the application in accordance with law after affording due opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 11th day of January, 2024. Sd/- Sd/- (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; �दनांक / Dated : 11th January, 2024. Sujeet आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The CIT, Exemption, Pune. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “B” ब�च, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 5. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.