Bhavip Pratap Pratisthan, Udaipur V. CIT(E), Jaipur

ITA 163/JODH/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 103 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9107 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-11-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 01-11-2022
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 17-11-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Reasonable cause; Set aside
• Section: 80G; 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 162 & 163/Jodh/2020 (ASSESSMENT YEAR – 2020-21) Bhavip Pratap Pratisthan 3-B Hajareshwar Colony Udaipur Vs CIT(E) Jaipur (Raj.) (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN NO. AACTB 9950 E Assessee By Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta (Adv.) Revenue By Smt. Alka Rajvanshi Jain, CIT-DR Date of hearing 02/11/2022 Date of Pronouncement 02/11/2022 O R D E R PER: B.R. BASKARAN, AM Both the appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the orders passed by ld. CIT(Exemption), Jaipur dated 17/09/2020. The appeal numbered as ITA No. 162/Jodh/2020 relates to rejection of registration sought by the assessee u/s 12AA of the Act. The other appeal relates to rejection of recognition sought u/s 80G of the Act. 2 ITA Nos. 162 & 163/Jodh/2020 Bhavip Pratap Pratisthan vs. CIT(E) 2. The ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(E) sought for details from the assessee and also provided final opportunity during the Covid period and hence the assessee could not comply with notices issued by ld. CIT(E) and also could not furnish the details called for. Accordingly, the ld. AR submitted that the matter may be restored to the file of ld. CIT(E) for examining the applications of the assessee afresh. 3. We heard ld. DR and perused the record. We notice that ld. CIT(E) has rejected the applications filed by the assessee on the reasoning that the assessee has not furnished the details called for by him. Having regard to the submissions made by ld. AR, we are of the view that there was reasonable cause for the assessee in not furnishing the details that were called for Ld CIT(E). Accordingly, in the interest of natural justice, we are of the view that the assessee may be provided with an opportunity to furnish various details. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by ld. CIT(E) and restore all the issues to his file with the direction to examine the applications filed by the assessee afresh in accordance with law. The ld. CIT(E) should also provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 3 ITA Nos. 162 & 163/Jodh/2020 Bhavip Pratap Pratisthan vs. CIT(E) 4. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 2 nd November, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (SANDEEP GOSAIN) (B. R. BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated : 02/11/2022 *Ganesh Kr Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR 6. Guard File Assistant Registrar Jodhpur Bench