GYANODAYA BHARAT TRUST,CHENNAI V. CIT, EXEMPTIONS, CHENNAI

ITA 385/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Gyanodaya Bharat Trust appealing against the order of the CIT (Exemptions), Chennai, which rejected their application for approval under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The rejection was primarily due to the Trust's failure to respond to notices from the CIT (Exemptions), which were inadvertently directed to the 'SPAM' folder of their email. The Tribunal recognized the violation of natural justice in the non-provision of a proper opportunity to the Trust to respond to the notices and thus decided to set aside the CIT's order and remand the matter for a fresh examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 396962 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KEERTHI NARAYANAN
• Assessee Lawyers: B. AGNUS JENNIFER
• Keywords: Set aside; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ \u0001यायपीठ, चे ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI \u0001ी एबी टी. वक , ाियक सद\u0011 एवं एवं एवं एवं \u0001ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद क े सम\u001b BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.385/Chny/2025 िनधा\u000eरण वष\u000e/Assessment Year: - Gyanodaya Bharat Trust, No.72, IV Floor, Raja Annamalai Buildings, Marshalls Road, Egmore, Chennai-600 008. v. The CIT (Exemption), Chennai. [PAN: AADTG 2473 Q] (अपीलाथ\u0016/Appellant) (\u0017\u0018यथ\u0016/Respondent) अपीलाथ\u0016 क\u001a ओर से/ Appellant by : Ms. B.Agnus Jennifer, Advocate for Mr. G. Baskar, Advocate \u0017\u0018यथ\u0016 क\u001a ओर से /Respondent by : Mr. Keerthi Narayanan, JCIT सुनवाईक\u001aतारीख/Date of Hearing : 23.04.2025 घोषणाक\u001aतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 26.05.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee-trust against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), (hereinafter referred to as “the Ld.CIT(E)”), Chennai, dated 09.12.2024 rejecting an online application filed by the assessee on 29.06.2024 in Form No.10AB u/s.80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as \"the Act”) seeking approval u/s.80G of the Act. ITA No.385/Chny/2025 (AY -) Gyanodaya Bharat Trust :: 2 :: 2. At the outset, the Ld.AR of the assessee brought to our notice that the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(E) is an ex parte order and she pleads that the notices alleged to have been sent by the Ld.CIT(E) have been dropped in the ‘SPAM’ account of the assessee and therefore, the assessee was not aware of the notices issued by the Ld.CIT(E) which prevented the assessee from responding to the notices issued by him. Therefore, according to the Ld.AR, the non-appearance/non-response to the notices was not deliberate and therefore, pleads for one more opportunity before the Ld.CIT(E). 3. Per contra, the Ld.DR doesn’t want us to give one more innings to the assessee. 4. Having heard both the parties and after perusal of the records, it is noted that the assessee trust has been granted provisional approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act and has applied for renewal of it which has been rejected only on the ground that the assessee failed to respond to the notices [dated 28.10.2024 & 18.11.2024] issued by the Ld.CIT(E). In this regard, the AO brought to our notice that notices issued by the Ld.CIT(E) went to the ‘SPAM’ account of the assessee and therefore, the assessee wasn’t aware of such notices. Be that as it may, since the assessee didn’t get proper opportunity before the Ld.CIT(E), there is a violation of natural justice and therefore, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order of ITA No.385/Chny/2025 (AY -) Gyanodaya Bharat Trust :: 3 :: the Ld.CIT(E) and restore the application back to his file for de novo examination in accordance to law. Having said so, the assessee is directed to file all the requisite documents as called for by the Ld.CIT(E) so that the Ld.CIT(E) can examine the same on its merits and take action in accordance to law. The Ld AR brought to our notice the e-mail ID for correspondence : [e-mail]. This id may also be considered by Ld CIT(E) while issuing notices to assessee. 5. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, the Ld.CIT(E) to pass orders afresh in accordance to law after hearing the assessee. 6. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on the 26th day of May, 2025, in Chennai. Sd/- (एस. आर. रघुनाथा) (S.R.RAGHUNATHA) लेखा सद\u0003य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sd/- (एबी टी. वक ) (ABY T. VARKEY) \u0005याियक सद\u0003य/JUDICIAL MEMBER चे ई/Chennai, !दनांक/Dated: 26th May, 2025. TLN आदेश क\u001a \u0017ितिलिप अ$ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ /Appellant 2. \u000e\u000fथ /Respondent 3. आयकरआयु\u0015/CIT, Chennai / Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore. 4. िवभागीय\u000eितिनिध/DR 5. गाड फाईल/GF "