INPHOG RESEARCH FOUNDATION,GURGAON vs. CIT(E), CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2000/DEL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 August 2023AY 2023-24Bench: SH. N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH.KUL BHARAT (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(E) had dismissed the applications for non-appearance. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal restored the appeals to the CIT(E) to be considered afresh after giving the assessee an adequate opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against two orders of the CIT(E) rejecting applications under sections 12AB and 80G. The appeals were barred by limitation but the delay was condoned. The assessee did not appear before the ITAT, leading to an ex-parte hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) rightly dismissed the applications for non-appearance, and whether the assessee was provided with adequate opportunity to be heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI

Before: SH. N. K. BILLAIYA & SH.KUL BHARAT

For Appellant: CA Sh. Deepesh Garg, Advocate
Hearing: 22/08/2023Pronounced: 22/08/2023

Appellant by Sh. Parikshit Agarwal, CA Sh. Deepesh Garg, Advocate Respondent by Sh. Waseem Arshad CIT(DR) Date of hearing: 22/08/2023 Date of Pronouncement: 22/08/2023 ORDER PER N. K. BILLAIYA, AM:

2001/Del/2023 are two separate appeals by the assessee preferred against two separate orders of the CIT(E), Chandigarh dated 09.01.2023 rejecting the application u/s. 12AB and 80 G of the Act respectively.

2.

Both these appeals are heard together and are disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity.

3.

The appeals are barred by limitation. We have carefully gone through the contents of the cause in delay in filing the appeals as mentioned in the affidavit. We are of the considered view that the assessee was prevented by reasonable and sufficient cause hence, delay is condoned.

4.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee inspite of mention in the order sheet entry dated 04.08.2023, therefore, we decided to proceed exparte. The DR was heard at length.

5.

On perusal of the order of the CIT(E), we find that both the applications have been dismissed for non appearance by the assessee before the CIT(E). We find that though there is a mention of the issue of notice but whether the notices were served is not known.

6.

In the interest of justice and fair play we deem it fit to restore the appeals to the files of the CIT(E). The CIT(E) is directed to consider the applications afresh after affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and the assessee is directed to comply the querries of the CIT(E).

7.

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purpose.

8.

Decision announced in the open court on 22.08.2023.

More judgments on Section 12AB

All 5,972 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →