RADISSON INDIA CHARITABLE FOUNDATION,GURGAON vs. CIT (EXEMPTINS), CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 344/CHANDI/2023Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 February 2024AY 2023-24Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee should be given an opportunity to present its case. The impugned orders were set aside with a direction to decide the applications afresh after providing adequate opportunity to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee foundation applied for final registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) and Section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) rejected the applications, alleging no reply was given by the assessee, despite the assessee claiming to have provided explanations and evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) properly considered the assessee's reply and evidence before rejecting the applications for registration under Sections 12A and 80G.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii),Section 80G(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Order

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

1.

The present appeal ( ITA 344/CHD/2023) has been preferred by the assessee Foundation agitating against the action of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld.CIT(E)’] dated 29.03.2023 in rejecting the application of the assessee for final registration u/s 12A(1)(ac) (iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act) whereas is relating to rejection of the application of the assessee for & 345/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2023-24 2 registration u/s 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act.

2.

At the outset the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee was earlier granted provisional registration u/s 12A of the Act. Thereafter, the assessee applied for final registration whereupon the ld. CIT(E) raised certain queries which were duly replied by the assessee foundation. However, the ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application of the assessee without going through the reply and explanation given by the assessee alleging that the assessee has not given any reply/explanation. The ld. counsel has submitted that, in fact, the ld. CIT(E) has failed to take note of reply and evidences furnished by the assessee in response to the queries raised by the ld. CIT(E) and therefore, the rejection of the application of the assessee for final registration u/s 12A was not justified.

3.

The ld. counsel has further invited our attention to the impugned order passed in relation to the application for registration u/s 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act wherein the application for registration u/s 80G(5) has been rejected on the ground of dismissal of application of the assessee for final registration u/s 12A of the Income Tax Act.

4.

After considering the rival submissions and going through the record, in our view, the interest of justice will & 345/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2023-24 3 be well served if the assessee is given an opportunity to present its case before the ld. CIT(E). The impugned orders of the ld. CIT(E) in both the appeals are, therefore, set aside with a direction to decide both the applications of the assessee afresh after giving adequate opportunity to the assessee to present its case. Needless to say that the ld. CIT(E) will duly go through the details and evidences furnished by the assessee and thereafter, pass speaking orders in both the appeals.

5.

The appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced 27 t h February,2024.

More judgments on Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii)

All 1,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →