DHRUVE PANDOVE CRICKET TRUST,PATIALA vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

The Assessee in this appeal is aggrieved with the action of the Ld. CIT(E) in rejecting the application of the Assessee for approval u/s 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act').

At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the Assessee has brought our attention to the order of the Ld. CIT(E) to submit that the same is an ex- parte order. The Ld. Counsel has submitted that the Assessee did not receive any notice of hearing from the CIT(E). That the Assessee has come to notice of passing of the impugned order only through CPC portal. That no opportunity of hearing has ever been granted by the Ld. CIT(E) before passing of the impugned order.

We find that the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(E) is an ex-parte order. The application of the Assessee has been rejected for want of prosecution, whereas, the plea of the Assessee is that it had never received notice of hearing from the CIT(E) and, therefore, non- representation of the Assessee before the Ld. CIT(E) was not intentional.

Considering the rival submissions, in our view, the interest of justice will be well served if the matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for decision afresh on the application of the Assessee. We order according. The Ld. CIT(E) will serve the notice of hearing upon the Assessee through physical as well as electronical mode. Needless to say that the ld. CIT(E) will give proper opportunity to the Assessee to present its case and then to decide the same in accordance with law.

The appeal of the Assessee is treated as allowed for Statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 02.04.2024. (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) Judicial Member Dated : 02.04.2024 “आर.के.”

""यथ"/ The Respondent 3. आयकरआयु"त/ CIT

"वभागीय""त"न"ध, आयकरअपील"यआ"धकरण, च"डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड"फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायकपंजीकार/