RAVINDRANATH EDUCATIONAL DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), GUNTUR

These appeals are filed by the assessees against the orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) [CIT(E)] dated 24.02.2023. Since the issue involved in these appeals is common, these appeals are clubbed, heard together and a common order is being passed for the sake of convenience as under. Facts are extracted for I.T.A.130/Viz/2023.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed an e-applicati in Form No.10AB seeking registration u/s 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “Act”). Notice dated 01.12.2022 was issued in respect of proceedings u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) to the address mentioned in the Form 10AB to produce copy of Memorandum of Associaton / Trust Deed for verification and to furnish a detailed reply by 19.12.2022 on the specific information called for in the said notice. As there was no compliance from the assessee to the said notice, the assessee was given one more opportunity vide notice dated 02.01.2023 to submit the information / documents on or before 10.01.2023 as per the questionnaire given in detail. However, there is no response from the assessee and the assessee was given final opportunity of being heard vide ntoice dated 06.02.2023 to submit the information. However, there was no response from the assessee and the assessee has not filed any information or documentary evidence. Hence, after careful consideration of the application for registration in Form No.10AB, Ld.CIT(E) rejected the application seeking registration u/s 10AB, since, the assessee failed to furnish mandatory information and since the case is to be decided in time bound manner.

On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds :

The order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemtpion), Hyderabad is contrary to the facts and also the law applicable to the facts of the case.

Ground No.2 and 3 are related to rejection of application in Form No.10AB for registration u/s 12AB of the Act. At the outset, the Ld.AR submitted that the Ld.CIT(E) is not justified in rejecting the application filed in Form No.10AB for Registration u/s 12AB of the Act. The Ld.AR further submitted that the reply filed by the assessee on 08.12.2022 is not considered and therefore, pleaded to afford one more opportunity of being heard before the Ld.CIT(E) to substantiate it’s case.

Per contra, the Ld.DR submitted that the assessee was given sufficient opportunities of being heard before the Ld.CIT(E) and to furnish information or documentary evidence. However, since the assessee failed to submit mandatory information, the Ld.CIT(E) is justified in rejecting the applicaton filed in Form No.10AB for registration u/s 12AB. Therefore, pleaded to uphold the order passed by the Ld.CIT(E) and dismiss the appeal of the assessee.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is apparent from the records that the assessee was given sufficient opportunities before the Ld.CIT(E) to furnish the mandatory information for registration u/s 12AB. In response to the notices given by the Ld.CIT(E), the assessee has filed it’s reply on 08.12.2022, which was not looked into. Hence, the Ld.AR pleaded to afford one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee before the Ld.CIT(E). Therefore, keeping in view the principles of natural justice, we are inclined to remit the matter back to the file of the Ld.CIT(E) to afford one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to adhere to the notices issued and cooperate during the proceedings.

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.