BABA FARID SEWA TRUST,REWARI vs. CIT EXEMPTIONS, CHANDIGARH

1 ITA Nos. 1618 & 1619/Del/2023 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI

BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No.1618/DEL/2023 [U/s 80G] AND ITA No.1619/DEL/2023 [U/s 12AA]

Baba Farid Sewa Trust, Vs Commissioner of Income-tax Near Gurudwara, Jhajjar Road, (Exemptions), Chandigarh. Rewari-123401 PAN- AAETB5172C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Sh. Vikas Kumar, Adv. & Assessee represented by Sh. Akash, CA Department represented by Sh. Zafarul Haque Tanweer, CIT(DR) Date of hearing 17.10.2023 Date of pronouncement 17.10.2023

O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, JM:

The captioned appeals, preferred by the assessee, are directed against

separate orders dated 22.03.2023 u/s 80G and 16.03.2023 u/s 12AA of the Income-

tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the “Act”, passed by the learned

Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh. Both the appeals were

heard together and are being disposed of by a common order for the sake of

convenience.

2 ITA Nos. 1618 & 1619/Del/2023 2. First we take up ITA no. 1619/Del/2023 u/s 12AA of the Act. The assessee

has raised following grounds of appeal:

“1. That the orders passed on 16.03.2023 vide Form 10AD (See rule 2C or 11AA or 17A) by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh [hereinafter referred to as the 'CIT(E)'], has been arbitrary and unjust in denying the registration application for registration u/s 12A(l)(ac)(iii) of the Act under section 12AB ex-party without give proper opportunity through proper mode of communication. 2. That the learned CIT(E), Chandigarh has erred both in law and on facts in rejecting application for seeking registration U/S 12AB of the Act filed by the appellant Charitable Trust, solely on the basis of absence of the requisite submissions of the appellant in response to the letter issued by Ld. CIT(E) while the fact is that such letter was uploaded by Ld. CIT(E) only on E-Filling portal without communicating through registered E-Mail, SMS on registered mobile and /or postal service which is gross violation of natural justice 3. That in any view of the facts and circumstances of the case of the appellant Charitable Trust it is entitled for grant of registration U/S 12AB of the Act, which be kindly granted 4. The Appellant craves the leave to add, amend, alter and/or delete any of the above grounds of appeal at/or before the time of hearing as the circumstances of the case may require or justify.”

seeking condonation of delay. Learned counsel for the assessee reiterated the

submissions as made in the application. Learned DR opposed the submissions.

Looking to the facts as stated in the application, the delay in filing the appeal is

condoned and the appeal is taken up for hearing.

3 ITA Nos. 1618 & 1619/Del/2023 4. Facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the assessee filed application

for registration u/s 12A(10(ac)(iii) of the Act on 7.10.2022. The learned

CIT(Exemptions) called upon the assessee to furnish certain supporting evidences.

Learned CIT(E) recorded that on the give date no one attended the proceedings nor

any response to the notice was given. Therefore, the application of the assessee

was rejected by the learned CIT(E). Aggrieved, the assessee has come up in appeal

before this Tribunal.

that notice issued by the learned CIT(E) was not received by the assessee. He

contended that in the interest of principles of justice, an opportunity be given to the

assessee for representing its case before the learned CIT(E).

the assessee did not file the requisite details, therefore, the learned CIT(E) was

justified in rejecting the application for registration u/s 12A of the Act.

record. The only basis for rejection of the application by the learned CIT(E) was

that the assessee could not attend the proceedings and did not furnish the requisite

details. It is seen from the record that only two opportunities were given to the

assessee. It is stated on behalf of the assessee that notices sent by learned CIT(E)

4 ITA Nos. 1618 & 1619/Del/2023 were not received by the assessee. Considering the totality of facts and in the

interest of natural justice we are of the considered view that the assessee should be

given an opportunity to represent its case. Therefore, impugned order passed by the

learned CIT(E) is set aside and the application for registration u/s 12A of the Act is

restored to the file of learned CIT(E) for decision afresh, of course, after affording

adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Appeal stands allowed for

statistical purposes.

has raised following grounds of appeal:

“1. That the orders passed on 22.03.2023 vide Form 10AD (See rule 2C or 11AA or 17A) by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh [hereinafter referred to as the 'CIT(E)'], has been arbitrary and unjust in denying the registration application for registration u/s 80G(5) of the Act under section 80G ex-party without give proper opportunity through proper mode of communication. 2. That the learned CIT(E), Chandigarh has erred both in law and on facts in rejecting application for seeking registration U/S 80G(5) of the Act filed by the appellant Charitable Trust, solely on the basis of absence of the requisite submissions of the appellant in response to the letter issued by Ld. CIT(E) while the fact is that such letter was uploaded by Ld. CIT(E) only on E-Filling portal without communicating through registered E-Mail, SMS on registered mobile and /or postal service which is gross violation of natural justice. 3. That in any view of the facts and circumstances of the case of the appellant Charitable Trust it is entitled for grant of registration U/S 80G(5) of the Act, which be kindly granted.

5 ITA Nos. 1618 & 1619/Del/2023 4. The Appellant craves the leave to add, amend, alter and/or delete any of the above grounds of appeal at/or before the time of hearing as the circumstances of the case may require or justify.”

u/s 80G of the Act was rejected by the learned CIT(E) on the ground that the

assessee was not registered u/s 12AB of the Act. Aggrieved, the assessee is in

appeal before this Tribunal.

record. The learned CIT(E) rejected the application for registration u/s 80G of the

Act, inter alia, by observing as under:

“2. In the present case, an application u/s 12AB was also filed on 07.10.2022, which was rejected on the basis of non-compliance vides DIN & Notice No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2022- 23/1050848295(1) dated 16.03.2023.The present application for approval u/s 80G(5), in absence of any registration under section 12AB or 10(23) /10(23C), doesn’t meet the requirement for approval as mandated by section 80G(5) of the I.T. Act, 1961 and Rule 11AA of the I.T. Rules, 1962. Accordingly, the request for grant of approval u/s 80G cannot be decided on the merits of the case and, therefore, declined.”

10.1 Apropos to the grounds the parties have adopted the same arguments as in

ITA no. 1619/Del/2023.Considering the fact that the assessee was not granted

adequate opportunity to subserve the principles of natural justice, we hereby set

6 ITA Nos. 1618 & 1619/Del/2023 aside the impugned order and restore the application for registration u/s 80G of the Act to the file of learned CIT(E) to decide the same afresh after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Appeal stands allowed for statistical

purposes. 11. In the result appeals of the assessee in ITA nos. 1618/Del/2023 and 1619/Del/2023 stand allowed for statistical purposes only.

Order pronounced in open court on 17th October, 2023.

Sd/- Sd/- (M. BALAGANESH) (KUL BHARAT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *MP* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI