Rashi Lal Samajik Utthan Sansthan, Allahabad V. CIT, Allahabad

ITA 203/ALLD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 20320714 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-11-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 02-11-2012
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 13-10-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y P SRIVASTA VA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 80G; 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ALLAHABAD BENCH, ALLAHABAD BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.L. GEHLOT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 203/ALLD./2011 RASHI LAL SAMAJIK UTTHAN SANSTHAN, VS. THE COMMIS SIONER OF 67/1B/37, DAYANAND MARG, ALLAHABAD. INCOME-TAX, A LLAHABAD. (PAN : AABTR 1374 D) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI PRAVEEN GODBOLE, C.A. RESPONDENT BY : Y.P. SRIVASTAVA, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 02.11.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER : 08.11.2012 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF LD. CIT, ALLAHABAD DATED 19.07.2011, REJECTING THE APPLICATI ON FOR REGISTRATION U/S. 12AA AND 80G OF THE IT ACT. 2. THE LD. CIT NOTED THAT ON FILING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION UNDER THE ABOVE PROVISION, THE REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFI CER WAS CALLED FOR BUT NOBODY APPEARED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFORE, T HE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT RECOMMEND FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION UNDER THE ABOVE PROVISION. THE LD.CIT PROVIDED OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE FOR 23.06.2011 AND ON THAT DAY, THE HEARING WAS ADJOURNED ON THE REQUEST OF MANAGIN G TRUSTEE, SHRI DEEPAK ITA NO. 203/ALLD./2011 2 AGARWAL AND THE MATTER WAS FIXED TO 07.07.2011. ON THAT DATE, NOBODY APPEARED BEFORE THE LD. COMMISSIONER. THE APPLICATIONS UNDER CONSIDERATION WERE REJECTED BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PROVE THAT IT WAS DO ING ANY CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES. 3. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS DOING CHARITABLE ACTIVITY AND WAS PREPARING DOCUMENTS FOR FILING BEFORE THE LD. COMMISSIONER, BUT DUE TO NO SUFFICIENT TIME GRANTED , THE NOTICE COULD NOT BE COMPLIED WITH. HE SUBMITTED THAT IT WAS ONLY THE FI RST DATE OF HEARING AND THE ASSESSEE UNDERTOOK TO COMPLY WITH ALL THE NOTICES B EFORE THE LD. COMMISSIONER AND REQUESTED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMANDED TO HIM FO R RECONSIDERATION. THE LD. DR RELIED UPON THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIO NER. 4. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE FACTS, WE ARE OF T HE VIEW THAT THE MATTER REQUIRES RECONSIDERATION AT THE LEVEL OF THE LD. CO MMISSIONER. THE LD. COMMISSIONER NOTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID N OT RECOMMEND FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION TO THE ASSESSEE, BUT IT IS NOT EXPLAIN ED WHETHER THE REPORT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS CONFRONTED TO THE ASSESSEE FO R ITS COMMENTS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SENT THE REPORT TO THE LD. COMMISSIONER, WH ICH WAS RECEIVED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER ON 06.07.2011 AND THE DATE OF HEARING WAS FIXED ON 07.07.2011. THEREFORE, IT APPEARS THAT THE COMMENTS OF THE ASSE SSING OFFICER HAVE NOT BEEN CONFRONTED TO THE ASSESSEE, AS THERE WAS NO SUFFICI ENT TIME BETWEEN 06.07.2011 ITA NO. 203/ALLD./2011 3 WHEN THE REPORT WAS SUBMITTED TO THE LD. CIT AND TH E DATE OF HEARING FIXED BEFORE THE LD. CIT ON 07.07.2011. FURTHER, PRACTICALLY, IT WAS THE FIRST DATE OF HEARING. THEREFORE, IT APPEARS THAT NO SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNIT Y OF HEARING HAS BEEN GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE UNDE RTOOK BEFORE US THAT ASSESSEE WOULD COMPLY WITH ALL THE NOTICES BEFORE THE LD. CI T. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE GIVEN ONE MORE OPPORTUN ITY TO ADDUCE SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE BEFORE THE LD. CIT IN SUPPORT OF REGISTRAT ION APPLICATION. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, WE SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER A ND RESTORE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE MATTER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE LD. CIT SHALL GIVEN REASONABLE AND SUFFICI ENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (A.L. GEHLOT) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *AKS/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A), CONCERNED BY ORDER 4. CIT, CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, ALLAHABAD 6. GUARD FILE ASSTT. REGISTRAR TRUE COPY