Kadri Kambla Shree Gopalkrishna Mutt Seva Trust , Mangalore V. Commissioner of Income TAx (EXemption) , Bangalore

ITA 2060/BANG/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4662 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-06-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 25-10-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NARENDRA PRASAD
• Assessee Lawyers: S RAMASUBRAMANIAM
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 80G; 12A; 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 2060 / BANG/201 7 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 1 7 - 1 8 M/S. KADRI KAMBLA SHREE GOPALAKRISHNA MUTT SEVA TRUST (REGD.), SHREE GOPALAKRISHNA MUTT, KADRI KAMBLA, POST BEJAI, MANGALORE 575 004. PAN: AACTK8393G VS. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), BANGALORE. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. RAMASUBRAMANIAM, CA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD, CIT (DR) DATE OF HEARING : 05 .0 6 .2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08 .0 6 .2018 O R D E R PER SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THIS IS DI RECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), BANGALORE DATED 16.08.2017 PASSED BY HIM U/S. 12AA OF IT ACT. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER. 1. THAT THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF IN COME-TAX (EXEMPTION), IN SO FAR IT IS PREJUDICIAL TO THE INT EREST OF THE APPELLANT IS BAD AND ERRONEOUS IN LAW AND AGAINST THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 2. THAT THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF IN COME-TAX (EXEMPTION) IN DENYING THE REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT IS VIOLATIVE OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE IS LIABLE TO BE QU ASHED. 3. THAT THE FINDING OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTION) THAT THE APPELLANT HAS NOT RESPONDED TO THE NOTICES ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT IS PERVERSE AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE MATERIALS ON ITA NO.2060/BANG/2017 PAGE 2 OF 3 RECORD. 4. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (EXE MPTION) OUGHT TO HAVE GRANTED THE REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. 5. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9EXE MPTION) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN PASSING THE ORDER U/S. 80G O F THE ACT EVEN THOUGH THE APPELLANT HAS NOT MADE ANY APPLICATION O F RECOGNITION U/S. 80G OF THE ACT. EACH OF THE ABOVE GROUNDS IS WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO O NE ANOTHER AND THE APPELLANT CRAVES THE LEAVE OF THE HON'BLE INCOME TA X APPELLANT TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE TO ADD, DELETE, MODIFY, AMEND O R OTHERWISE ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT THE TIME OR DURING THE HEA RING OF THE APPEAL. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LD. AR OF ASSESSEE THAT ON P AGES 7 AND 8 OF PAPER BOOK IS THE SUBMISSION MADE BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE LD. CIT( E), BANGALORE AND THOSE SUBMISSIONS ARE DATED 12.08.2017 BUT LD. CIT(E) HAS PASSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER ON 16.08.2017 WITHOUT CONSIDERING THESE SUBMI SSIONS AND THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THIS MATTER SHOULD BE REST ORED BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT(E), BANGALORE FOR FRESH DECISION. THE LD. DR OF REVENU E SUPPORTED THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF LD. CIT(E). 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FI ND THAT ON PAGE NO. 1 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, LD. CIT (E), HE HAS STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUESTED TO PROVIDE SEVERAL DOCUMENTS AND THE ASSESSEE WAS TO C OMPLY BY 14.08.2017 BUT TILL DATE I.E. UP TO 16.08.2017, THE ASSESSEE HAS N OT RESPONDED. BUT AS PER PAGES 7 AND 8 OF PAPER BOOK, THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS DATED 12.08.2017 AND THE SAME WERE SENT TO CIT(E) B Y SPEED POST. IT MAY BE THAT THE SAID SUBMISSIONS DID NOT REACH TO THE LD. CIT(E) BEFORE HE PASSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER. BUT STILL WE FEEL THAT IN THE INTE REST OF JUSTICE, THE MATTER SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(E) FOR A FR ESH DECISION AND ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(E) AND RESTORE TH E MATTER BACK TO HIS FILE FOR FRESH DECISION WITH THE DIRECTION THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD SUBMIT ALL THE REQUIRED DETAILS BEFORE CIT(E) THROUGH AR AND NOT B Y SPEED POST AND AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF LD. AR OF ASSESSEE, THE LD. CIT(E) SHOULD PASS NECESSARY ORDER AS PER LAW. NEEDLESS TO SAY, LD. C IT (E) SHOULD PROVIDE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE . ITA NO.2060/BANG/2017 PAGE 3 OF 3 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENT IONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/- SD/- (N.V. VASUDEVAN) (ARUN KUMAR GARODIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 08 TH JUNE, 2018. /MS/ COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 4. CIT(A) 2. RESPONDENT 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE 3. CIT 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE.