M/S AGGARSAIN PUBLIC EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,PATIALA vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI A.D.JAIN & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY
PER A.D.JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT
These are assessee's appeals for assessment year
2022-23 against the separate orders dated 27.09.2022 and
18.01.2023 respectively passed by the ld. Commissioner of
Income Tax (Exemptions) Chandigarh [in short ‘the
CIT(E)’].
As the issues, facts and circumstances are identical
in both these appeals, therefore, these were heard together
ITA 567&568/CHD/2023 A.Y.2022-23 2 and are being disposed of by a common order for the sake
of brevity. The facts and issues are taken from ITA
No.567/CHD/2023. In this appeal, the assessee has
raised the following grounds of appeal:
That the Ld. CIT(E) has erred in rejecting the registration u/s 80G(5) both on facts and law. 2. That the order for rejection of registration u/s 80G(5) is an ex-parte order passed without sending the notices for hearing on e-mail or physically without allowing opportunity of being heard. 3. That the Ld. CIT(E) has erred in passing a rejection order u/s 80G(5) 'in a mechanical manner without application of mind in lieu of application filed by appellant for seeking final registration u/s 12AB (application no. CIT Exemptions Chandigarh /2022-23/12AA/10871)
The facts of the case are that the assessee filed
application for approval of the registration of the Trust
under clause (iii) of first provision to Section 80G(5) of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 on 29.03.2022. A questionnaire was
issued to the assessee electronically by the ld. CIT (E) on
15.09.2022 requesting the assessee to furnish relevant
supporting documents, details and evidence etc., through
e-proceedings on e-filing portal by 20.09.2022. On the
stipulated date, neither any submissions/evidence etc.
was filed nor any request for adjournment was made
through any channel. Therefore, another opportunity was
provided on 21.09.2022 and the case was fixed for
ITA 567&568/CHD/2023 A.Y.2022-23 3 23.09.2022. On that date also, neither any online/offline
reply was submitted nor any request for adjournment was
received. As a final opportunity, the case was fixed for
26.09.2022, but, on that date also, position remained the
same. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(E) rejected the application
filed by the assessee considering it to be deficient in
factual evidences and on account of non-appearance on
the date of hearings. The relevant part of the order of the
ld. CIT (E) is as under :
“In view of the above discussions, the present application of the assessee filed in Form 10AB under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act is disposed of as being deficient in factual evidences in the absence of the requisite submissions and appearances of the assessee at the scheduled hearings. This is despite the granting of at least three opportunities as above. It is pertinent to mention here that it is mandated by the provisions of under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act that where the trust or institution has been provisionally approval u/s 80G it has to make an application for approval u/s 80G within six months of commencement of activities. In the absence of any submission from the applicant it is not possible to ascertain the objects and activities carried out by the applicant. Accordingly the application filed by the applicant for approval u/s 80G of the Act is hereby rejected, which rejection and consequent lack of registration will apply from this F.Y. 2022-23 onwards and also supersede any approval granted u/s 80G of the Act by any authority at any earlier time.
Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before this
Tribunal.
ITA 567&568/CHD/2023 A.Y.2022-23 4 5. We have heard the parties and have perused the
material on record. On perusal of the record, it is noticed
that the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT (E) is an ex-
parte order. The notices were issued electronically to the
assessee. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has contended
that no notice for hearing on e-mail or physically was ever
served on the assessee. Further, there is nothing on
record to show that the assessee was issued proper notice
of hearing. The matter now stands covered by the
decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the
case of ‘Munjal BSU Centre of Innovation and
Entrepreneurship, Ludhiana through its authorized
signatory Shri Bharat Goyal Vs Commissioner of Income
Tax (E), Chandigarh’, in CWP 21028-2023 (O&M), wherein,
vide order dated 04.03.2024, their Lordships have held
that the provisions of Section 282(1) of the Income Tax Act
and Rule 127(1) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, envisage
that it is essential that before any action is taken, a
communication of the notice must be in terms of these
provisions; that these provisions do not make mention of
communication to be “deemed” by placing the notice on
the e-portal of the Department; that a pragmatic view has
ITA 567&568/CHD/2023 A.Y.2022-23 5 always to be adopted in these circumstances; that an
individual or a company is not expected to keep the e-
portal of the Department open all the times so as to have
knowledge of what the Department is supposed to be doing
with regard to the submissions of forms, etc.; and that the
principles of natural justice are inherent in the Income
Tax provisions and the same are required to be necessarily
followed.
Considering all the facts and circumstances, the
impugned order of the ld.CIT(E) is set aside and the matter
is restored to the file of the CIT(E) to decide the
application of the assessee for final approval of
registration on merits after giving adequate opportunity to
the assessee to present its case. The assessee, no doubt,
shall cooperate in the fresh proceedings before the ld. CIT
(E).
The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for
statistical purposes.
As the issues, facts and circumstances in ITA
568/CHD/2023 are identical to ITA 567/CHD/2023,
therefore, our findings given in ITA 567/CHD/2023 would
ITA 567&568/CHD/2023 A.Y.2022-23 6 apply mutatis-mutandis to ITA 568/CHD/2023 also.
Accordingly, ITA 568/CHD/2022 is also allowed for
statistical purposes.
In the result, both appeals of the assessee are
allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 16.05.2024.
Sd/- Sd/-
(KRINWANT SAHAY) (A.D.JAIN ) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER “Poonam”
आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�/ CIT 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar