The Raddi Sahakara BankNiyamitha Station Road , Dharwad V. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1), Hubli

ITA 1152/BANG/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5596 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-01-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 23-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR P V PRADEEP ACIT
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1152/BANG/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 THE RADDI SAHAKARA BANK NIYAMITHA, STATION ROAD, NEAR HEAD POST OFFICE, DHARWAD. PAN : AAAAT3297K VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), HUBLI. APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : MS. SHEETAL, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : DR. P. V. PRADEEP, ACIT DATE OF HEARING : 29.01.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31.01.2018 O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST T HE ORDER OF CIT(A), DENYING THE REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTENDED THAT CIT HAS DENIED THE REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSE SSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS DESPITE OPPORTUNITY AFFORDED TO HIM, BUT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ALL THE RELEVANT EVIDENCES FILED BEFORE THE CIT TO JUSTIFY ITS OBJEC T AND ITS ACT. BUT THE CIT DID NOT TAKE COGNIZANCE OF THE SAME AND DENIED THE REGISTRATION. THE LEARNED DR PLACED THE RELIANCE UPON THE ORDER O F THE CIT. 2. WE HAVE CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDER OF THE CIT ALONG WITH DOCUMENTS FILED BEFORE US AND WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE HAS FILED PLENTY OF DOCUM ENTS BEFORE CIT. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE CIT IGNORED THE SAME AND DENIED THE RE GISTRATION ON THE GROUND THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED THE REQUISITE EVIDENCE. SINCE TH E ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE RELEVANT EVIDENCE ITA NO. 1152/BANG/2017 PAGE 2 OF 2 BEFORE THE CIT, THE CIT SHOULD HAVE EXAMINED THE SA ME BEFORE TAKING A FINAL VIEW WITH REGARD TO THE GRANT OF REGISTRATION. WE THEREFORE SET ASI DE THE ORDER OF THE CIT AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO HIS FILE WITH A DIRECTION TO READJUDICATE THE IS SUE AFRESH AFTER AFFORDING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE LIGHT OF DOCUMENTS FIL ED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO PLACE ALL RELEVANT EVIDENCE BEFORE CIT FOR PROPER ADJUDICATION OF THE ISSUE OF REGISTRATION. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31 ST JANUARY, 2018. SD/- SD/- ( INTURI RAMA RAO ) (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE : BANGALORE DATED : 31/01/2018 /NS/* COPY TO : 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT(A)-II BANGALORE 4 CIT 5 DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6 GUARD FILE BY ORDER SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY, ITAT, BANGALORE.