MAHARISHI DAYANAND MATH,JALANDHAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
Before: DR. M. L. MEENA & SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE
Per Bench:
The captioned appeals are filed by the assessee against the separate
orders of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh
dated 19.12.2022 & 16.01.2023 challenging therein rejection of application
for grant of regular registration and cancellation of provisional registration
granted per se u/s 10(23C)(vi) and 12AA arbitrary against principles of
natural justice on the following identical grounds of appeals being extracted
from appeal in ITA No. 227/Asr/2023 as under:
“1. That the ld. CIT(E) erred in arbitrarily rejecting the assessee’s application for grant of regular registration u/s 10(23C)(vi).
That for want of receipt/service of any of the notices said to have been issued by the ld. CIT(E), the rejection of application for grant of regular registration and cancellation of provisional registration earlier granted, is per se arbitrary, against natural justice and hence liable to be set aside and quashed.
3 ITA Nos. 227 to229/Asr/2023 Managing C.S.P. Mahavidyalaya &Ors. v. CIT 3. That even otherwise, all the relevant documents and evidence were part of the application filed which did not justify arbitrary rejection of assessee’s application.
That the order under appeal being unjust, arbitrary against natural justice and de hors the facts and law, is liable to be set aside.”
The appellant has filed an application for approval under clause (iii) of
first proviso to clause (23C) of section 10 [for applicants covered under
sub-clause (iv) of clause (23C) of section 10] of the Act on 01.06.2022. The
Ld. PCIT Exemption has rejected the application by observing that in the
absence of any submission from the applicant it is not possible to ascertain
the objects and activities carried out by the applicant. Accordingly, the ld.
CIT(E) has rejected the application filed by the applicant for approval u/s
10(23C) of the Act by observing that consequent to lack of registration will
apply from this F.Y. 2022-23 onwards and supersede any approval granted
u/s 10(23C) of the Act by any authority at any earlier time.
At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that this
a covered matter by Coordinate Bench decision in the case of “Jagriti
Foundation Charitable Trust v. CIT(E)”, Chandigarh in ITA No.
174/Asr/2023 order dated 12.07.2023 on the issue of violation of
principles of natural justice, in view of non-service of noticesissued by
the ld. CIT(E) and non-communications at the same for calling for
4 ITA Nos. 227 to229/Asr/2023 Managing C.S.P. Mahavidyalaya &Ors. v. CIT information. Thus, the counsel argued that ld. CIT(E)’s rejection of the
assessee’s application for grant of regular registration u/s 10(23C) of the
Act, ex-parte qua the assessee is per se illegal.
Per contra, the ld. CIT-DR supported the impugned order. He
contended that there are notices issued by the ld. CIT(E) to the appellant
assessee, which remained un-complied. However, he has no objection to
the request of the ld. AR in restoring the matter to the CIT(E) to adjudicate
the matter afresh in view of the principles of natural justice.
Heard the rival contention, perused the material on record and the
impugned order. Admittedly, the application for grant of registration u/s
10(23C) of the Act filed by the applicant on 24.11.2022 for grant of regular
registration has been rejected by the ld. CIT(E) ex-parte qua the assessee
trust. The ld. CIT(E) has mentioned that there are notices for granting
opportunity of being heard were issued to the applicant trust, however, he
has not mentioned the factum of service of these notices. Thus, the CIT(E)
proceeded to reject the application of the trust ex-parte qua the applicant
trust based on the material available on the record and thereby rejected the
application by upholding that the assessee has been non-cooperative, and
5 ITA Nos. 227 to229/Asr/2023 Managing C.S.P. Mahavidyalaya &Ors. v. CIT it is safely concluded that the assessee did not want to adduce the
evidence as it would expose falsity and lack of genuineness.
From the above, it is evident that such an action of the ld. CIT(E) in
rejecting the application for grant of regular registration and cancellation of
provisional registration earlier granted is held to be per se arbitrary and
against the principles of natural justice. In our view, this is fit case to be
remanded back to the CIT(E) with the direction to adjudicate the matter
afresh after granting adequate opportunity of being heard, in order to
enable the appellant trust to file the necessary details on the nature of the
objects, genuineness of activities and any other information so desired by
the ld. CIT(E) to satisfy itself for the purpose of granting registration u/s
10(23C) of the Act as per mandate. The counsel undertakes that the
assessee shall cooperate in the fresh proceeding for adjudication of its
application for grant of registration u/s 10(23C) of the Act, on merits of the
case.
On parity of facts, following Coordinate Bech decision in the case of
“Jagriti Foundation Charitable Trust v. CIT(E)”, (Supra) we consider it deem
fit to restore back the matter to the file of the CIT(E) to adjudicate the
application of the applicant trust for grant of regular registration u/s
6 ITA Nos. 227 to229/Asr/2023 Managing C.S.P. Mahavidyalaya &Ors. v. CIT 10(23C)(vi) of the Act, afresh after granting adequate opportunity of being
heard and considering the details filed along with the application and to be
filed in the course of fresh proceedings. At the same time, the assessee
trust is also directed to co-operate in the fresh proceedings by furnishing
the relevant documents and evidence required by the ld. CIT(E) to his
satisfaction on the queries raised in reference to the nature of the object
and genuineness of the activities and the manner of carrying the activities
as per amended provisions of law for grant of registration under the Act.
Accordingly, the matter is restored to the ld. CIT(E).
The facts in ITA No. 227/Asr/2023 are similar to the facts in ITA No.
228/Asr/2023 and ITA No. 229/Asr/2023 except variation of the section
being 12AA and therefore our observation and finding given above would
be applicable to these two appeals in mutatis/mutandis.
In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed for statistical
purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 31.08.2023
Sd/- Sd/- (Anikesh Banerjee) (Dr. M. L. Meena) Judicial Member Accountant Member *GP/Sr.PS*
7 ITA Nos. 227 to229/Asr/2023 Managing C.S.P. Mahavidyalaya &Ors. v. CIT Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant: (2) The Respondent: (3) The CIT(Appeals) (4) The CIT concerned (5) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By Order
