M/s The Chandi Kusht Ashram Society, Chandigarh V. CIT-II, Chandigarh

ITA 1008/CHANDI/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 86175 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-02-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 04-02-2015
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 17-11-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR AMA RVEER SINGH
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH A, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R.SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1008/CHD/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15) THE CHANDI KUSHT ASHRAM SOCIETY, VS. THE C.I.T-II, OPPOSITE 3BRD, SHIV RAM CHANDIGARH. MANDIR GATE, SECTOR 47, CHANDIGARH. PAN: AAATC6251B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI AJAY JAIN RESPONDENT BY : DR.AMARVEER SINGH, DR DATE OF HEARING : 04.02.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06.02.2015 O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, CHANDIGARH DATED 8.10.2014 REJECTING THE APPLICATI ON FOR APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 80G(5)(VI) OF THE ACT. 2. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX NOTED THA T THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 29.9.2014 AND ON THAT DATE NOBODY APPEARED BEFORE HIM. THEREFORE, THE APPLIC ATION WAS REJECTED. 2 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE EARLIER APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 80G(5)(VI) OF THE AC T HAS BEEN GIVEN VIDE ORDER DATED 18.8.2014. COPY FILED ON R ECORD AND IT WAS FRESH APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION ONLY, FOR WHICH NO NOTICE HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE AFFIDAVIT OF SHRI BALRAMAN PERIASAMY IS FILED IN SUPPORT OF THE CONTE NTION. 4. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE AR E OF THE VIEW THAT THE MATTER REQUIRES RECONSIDERATION AT TH E LEVEL OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, CHANDIGA RH. THE FACTS DISCLOSED WOULD SHOW THAT THE EARLIER APPROVA L WAS GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 80G(5) OF THE ACT AND THE PRESENT APPLICATION WAS FOR EXTENSION ONLY. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX HAS NOT RECORDED ANYTHIN G IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER IF ANY NOTICE WAS SERVED UPON THE AS SESSEE FOR THE DATE OF HEARING. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE AFFID AVIT IS FILED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE TO CLAIM THAT NO NOTICE H AVE BEEN SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, IT IS A CASE OF DENIAL OF OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ORDER CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. 5. WE ACCORDINGLY, SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND RESTORE THE MATTER IN ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, CHANDIGARH WITH DIRECTION TO REDECID E THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW BY GIVING REASONABLE SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE SHALL COOPERATE WITH THE COM MISSIONER OF INCOME TAX IN FINALIZING OF THE MATTER. 3 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 6 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2015. SD/- SD/- (T.R.SOOD) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 6 TH FEBRURAY, 2015 *RATI* COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT(A)/TH E CIT/THE DR. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH