SHRI MAHARAJA AGGARSAIN VIKAS TRUST,MANSA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 77/ASR/2023Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 August 2023AY 2023-245 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee was denied a reasonable opportunity of hearing and that the CIT(E) had rejected the application ex parte. Considering the extension of dates by CBDT and the assessee's reasons for non-appearance, the matter was remitted back to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a charitable trust, applied for renewal of registration under Section 12A. The CIT(Exemption) rejected the application ex parte due to the assessee's non-appearance, citing non-receipt of notices. The assessee claimed ignorance of the computer system and non-receipt of notices via email.

What were the issues?

Whether the denial of registration renewal was justified without providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Whether the ex parte rejection of the application was valid given the circumstances of non-receipt of notices.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A,Section 12AB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR.

Before: DR. M. L. MEENA & SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

Hearing: 08.08.2023Pronounced: 21.08.2023

Per:Anikesh Banerjee, JM The instant appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) Chandigarh,[in brevity ‘the CIT (E)’] order passed u/s 12A(ac) (iii) of the Income Tax Act 1961[in brevity ‘the Act’] order dated 16.01.2023.

2. The assessee has taken the following grounds:

1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learnedCIT(Exemption) has erred in denying the renewal of registration u/s 12A of the Income tax Act, 1961.

2.

That the assessee had got registration u/s 12A fromassessment year 2001-02. So,the renewal of registration should have been allowed but the same was rejected on 16.01.2023.

3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(Exemption) has erred in giving a finding that the trust is not responding to the notices issued as no notice was received by the assessee on mail which is clear from the screen shot of portal.

4. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learnedCIT(Exemption) has erred in rejecting the application without checking its online record.

5.

That on the facts and in the circumstances of the caseand in law, the learned ClT(Exemption) has erred in relying on the various judgments while rejecting the registration u/s 12A of the Act which are not relevant to the facts of the case.

6.

That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learnedCIT(Exemption) was only required to see if there is any change in the objects which were charitable for the last 20 years or so and whether the trust is genuine and nothing more.

7.

That no reasonable opportunity was given to the assessee to meet the case. So, itis against natural law and justice. So, the order of rejection is liable to be quashed.

8.

That any other relief may kindly be granted to the assessee to whom it is foundentitled at the time of hearing of appeal.”

3.

Brief fact of the case is that the assessee is a Charitable Trust and filed application in Form No. 10AB u/s 12A (1) (ac) (iii) of the Act for registration u/s 12AA of the Act. The ld. CIT(E) issued the notice. The adjournment was taken and finally none was present on behalf of the assessee. The ld. CIT(E) rejected the assessee’s application, and the registration was cancelled u/s 12AB of the Act. Aggrieved assessee, filed an appeal before us for judicious consideration.

4.

The ld. AR for assessee vehemently argued and placed that the assessee was unable to submit the documents as the assessee ignorant in the computer system so, the notice was duly not received by the assessee. The ld. AR further prayed that the CBDT extended the date till 30.09.2023 for approval of registration u/s 12AB of the Act. The ld. AR prayed for remand back the matter to the ld. CIT(E) for further adjudication de novo. 5. The ld. DR relied on the order of the ld. CIT(E) but not made any objection against the assessee’s submission. 6. We heard the rival submission and considered the documents available in the record. The application of registration was duly cancelled on ex parte basis of nonappearance in the hearing proceedings. The ld. AR placed the reasons for nonappearance before the authority. Further the CBDT extended the date till 30.09.2023 by Circular 6 of 2023, F. No.370133/06/2023-TPL dated 24/05/2023. Considering above, the bonafide opportunity of the assessee was denied during the approval proceeding. We remit back the matter to the ld. CIT(E) for adjudication de novo. Needless to say, the assessee should get a reasonable opportunity of hearing in setting aside proceeding. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing is allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 12A

All 6,064 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →