MACBARA TRUST REP BY MANAGING TRUSTEE M.MOHAMED SHAJAHAN , RAMANATHAPURAM V. ITO , CIT (EXEMPTION), CHENNAI

ITA 1028/CHNY/2022

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. Macbara Trust, which appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai, rejecting their application for registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act. The rejection was initially made ex-parte and without a reasonable opportunity for the assessee to be heard, which the Tribunal found to be in violation of the principles of natural justice. The Tribunal noted that despite multiple opportunities given to the assessee to present their case, the CIT(E) did not consider the merits of the application but rejected it due to non-appearance of the assessee.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 132716 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-05-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 15-05-2023
• Assessment Year: 2022-2023
• Appeal Filed On: 04-12-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Set aside

Judgement Text

अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ ᭠यायपीठ,चे᳖ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI ᮰ीमहावीर ᳲसह, उपा᭟यᭃ एवं ᮰ी मनोज कुमार अᮕवाल, लेखा सद᭭य के समᭃ BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 1028/CHNY/2022 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ /Assessment Year:2022-23 M/s. Macbara Trust, Rep. by Managing Trustee Shri M. Mohamed Shajahan, 9/172, Maraikayar Street, Mandapam, Ramanathapuram Dist, - 623 518. PAN: AADTM 1500G v. The CIT (Exemption), Chennai. (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri K. Meenakshi Sundaram, ITP ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 16.05.2023 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 16.05.2023 आदेश /O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai in Application No.CIT(Exemption),Chennai/2022-23/12AA/10529 dated 29.09.2022. 2 I.T.A. No.1028/Chny/2022 2. The only issue in this appeal of assessee is as regards to the order of CIT(Exemption), Chennai rejecting the assessee’s application filed in Form No.10AB u/s.12(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act seeking registration u/s.12AB of the Act ex-parte and without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee in violation of principles of natural justice. For this assessee has raised various grounds which are argumentative, exhaustive and on merits also, hence need not be reproduced. 3. Brief facts are that the assessee filed online application in Form No.10AB u/s.12(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act on 30.03.2022 for granting of registration u/s.12AB of the Act. The CIT(E), Chennai posted the case for processing application u/s.12AB of the Act, first on 29.08.2022 but nobody attended or furnished any information. Again a show-cause notice dated 03.09.2022 was issued fixing the hearing on 08.09.2022. Nobody attended. Again the CIT(E) issued show cause notice dated 26.09.2022 fixing the matter on 28.09.2022 but nobody attended. Consequently the CIT(E) rejected the application without deliberating on merits vide order dated 29.09.2022. Aggrieved assessee is in appeal before Tribunal against rejection ex-parte. 3 I.T.A. No.1028/Chny/2022 4. Before us, the ld.AR for the assessee Shri K. Meenakshi Sundaram, ITP only pleaded mercy that one opportunity be provided and he undertook to present his case on the first date of hearing with all the documentary evidences in support of claim of registration u/s.12AB of the Act. When this was pointed out to ld.Senior DR, he contested the setting aside for the reason that despite numerous opportunities the assessee has not presented and hence, what is the guarantee this time assessee will present before CIT(E). But when it was pointed out to him that even the order of CIT(E) is not on merits because whatever information available in Form No.10B, the CIT(E) could have considered. As there is a failure on the part of the assessee to represent its case and CIT(E)’s order is not on merits, we set aside the order of CIT(E) and restore the matter back to the file of CIT(E) for allowing one more opportunity to the assessee to file the details and evidences and prove its case of claim of registration u/s.12AB of the Act. In term of the above, the order of CIT(E) is set aside and matter restored back to his file for fresh adjudication. The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 4 I.T.A. No.1028/Chny/2022 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 16 th May, 2023 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (मनोज कुमार अᮕवाल) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) लेखा सद᭭य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (महावीर ᳲसह ) (MAHAVIR SINGH) उपा᭟यᭃ /VICE PRESIDENT चे᳖ई/Chennai, ᳰदनांक/Dated, the 16 th May, 2023 RSR आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुᲦ /CIT 4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध/DR 5. गाडᭅ फाईल/GF.