I.T.A. NO. 213/LKW/16 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2016-17 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI P. K. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO.213/LKW/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2016-17 SPARSH FOUNDATION, 126, NIRANJANPUR, P.O. MAJRA, DEHRADUN. PAN:AAOTS9933J VS. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW. (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) O R D E R PER P. K. BANSAL, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE CIT (EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW DATED 22/09/2015. THE ONLY GR IEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL RELATES TO THE REJECTION OF APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE I.T. ACT. 2 . THE FACTS RELATED TO THIS CASE, IN BRIEF, ARE THA T THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY FILED AN APPLICATION U/S 12A(A) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 ON 13/ 04/2015 SEEKING REGISTRATION UNDER THE SAID SECTION. THE LEARNED CIT REJECTED THE APP LICATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND PASSED EX-PARTE ORDER BY OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSE E SOCIETY COULD NOT PRODUCE THE BOOKS, BANK STATEMENT AND VOUCHERS IN RESPECT OF EX PENSES CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR VERIFICATION OF ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST AND ON THIS BASIS HE CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS NOT CARRYING OUT ANY CHARIT ABLE ACTIVITIES. THE LEARNED CIT HELD THAT SUFFICIENT MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR SATISFAC TION REGARDING CHARITABLE PURPOSE OF THE TRUST HAS NOT BEEN MADE AVAILABLE BY THE ASSESS EE TRUST THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT BY SHRI SHUBHAM RASTOGI, C.A. RESPONDENT BY SHRI RAJIV JAIN, CIT, D.R. DATE OF HEARING 30/05/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 08/06/2016 I.T.A. NO. 213/LKW/16 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2016-17 2 SOCIETY COULD NOT BE GRANTED REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE I.T. ACT. ACCORDINGLY, THE REGISTRATION SOUGHT WAS REJECTED. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL. 2. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US VEHE MENTLY CONTENDED THAT THE CIT (EXEMPTIONS) HAS PASSED AN EX-PARTE ORDER AND D ISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. NO NOTICE OF HEARING HAS BEEN SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE WHEN THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING . 3. LEARNED D. R., ON THE OTHER HAND, SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT (EXEMPTIONS). 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, CAREFULLY C ONSIDERED THE SAME ALONG WITH THE ORDER OF CIT (EXEMPTIONS). WE NOTED FROM THE O RDER OF THE CIT (EXEMPTIONS) THAT HE HAS PASSED AN EX-PARTE ORDER. THE FACT IS THAT T HE ASSESSEE WAS NOT EFFECTIVELY BEEN HEARD. WE, THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTI CE AND FAIR PLAY TO BOTH THE PARTIES SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT (EXEMPTIONS) AND RES TORE THE APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE CIT (EXEMPTIONS) WITH THE DIRECTION THAT HE SHALL DECIDE THE APPEAL AFRESH AFTER GIVING PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING H EARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO CO-OPERATE WITH THE CIT (EXEMPT IONS) AND PROVIDE ALL THE NECESSARY INFORMATION AND DOCUMENT ASKED FOR BY CIT (EXEMPTIO NS). 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED STATISTICALLY. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 08/06/2016) SD/. SD/. ( ABY T. VARKEY ) ( P. K . BANSAL ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTA NT MEMBER DATED:08/06/2016 *SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW ASSTT . REGISTRAR