BOL BUM SEVA SAMITI, BHUBANESWAR V. CIT(EXEMPTION), HYD, HYDERABAD

ITA 235/CTK/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0812 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-07-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 22-05-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 80G

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE MANISH AGARWAL Bol Bum Seva Samiti, Plot No.3184, Puri By Pass Road, Pandra, Bhubaneswar PAN/GIR No (Appellant Per Bench ITA No. order of the ld CIT( for registration 2. ITA No. order of the ld CIT( for registration IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL AND MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.234 & 235/CTK/20 Assessment Year : 2025-2026 Bol Bum Seva Samiti, Plot No.3184, Puri By Pass Road, Pandra, Bhubaneswar Vs. CIT (Exemptions), Hyderabad PAN/GIR No.AAFTB 1022 L (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : Shri S.K.Hota, Revenue by : Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT Date of Hearing : 24/0 Date of Pronouncement : 24/0 O R D E R .234/CTK/2024 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the ld CIT(E), Hyderabad dated 1.4.2024 rejecting the application for registration u/s.12AB of the Act for the assessment year .235/CTK/2024 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the ld CIT(E), Hyderabad dated 1.4.2024 rejecting the application for registration u/s. 80G of the Act for the assessment year Page1 | 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /CTK/2024 2026 CIT (Exemptions), Hyderabad Respondent) Adv : Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT DR 07/2024 /07/2024 an appeal filed by the assessee against the rejecting the application for the assessment year 2025-26. an appeal filed by the assessee against the rejecting the application for the assessment year 2025-26. ITA Nos.234 & 235/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2025-2026 Page2 | 4 3. Shri S.K. Hota, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Sanjay Kumar, ld CIT DR appeared for the revenue. 4. It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee had filed applications for registration u/s.12AB and u/s.80G of the Act before the ld CIT(E). It was the submission that it is claimed by ld CIT(E) that notices were issued to the assessee in respect of proceedings u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act and in respect of proceedings u/s.80G(5)(iii) of the Act to produce the copy of Memorandum of Association/Trust deed for verification and to furnish a detailed reply on the specific information called for through e-mail of the assessee. It was the submission that the concerning person looking after the income tax matters of the appellant trust has inadvertently forgotten to check the e-mail, for which, the assessee could not comply with the notice issued by ld CIT(E). It was the submission that it was in this backdrop that the ld CIT(E) rejected both the application and dismissed the appeals of the assessee. Ld AR prayed that the appellant trust may be granted one more opportunity to produce the required details as called for by the ld CIT(E) for granting registration u/s.12AB and approval u/s.80G of the Act. 5. In reply, ld CIT DR did not raise any objection to the request of ld AR of the assessee. 6. We have considered the rival submissions. Ld CIT(Exemption), Hyderabad has rejected the applications filed by assessee for non- ITA Nos.234 & 235/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2025-2026 Page3 | 4 compliance. A perusal of the impugned orders of ld CIT(E), Hyderabad clearly shows that notices were issued to the assessee through e-mail to furnish the copy of Memorandum of Association/Trust deed for verification and to furnish a detailed reply on the specific information called for. However, the appellant trust failed to furnish the same, for which, the registration u/s. 12AB as well as approval u/s.80(5)G was rejected by the ld CIT(E). It was the contention of ld AR that no notices were received by the assessee. Now, ld AR submits that the appellant trust has all the evidences as sought by ld CIT(E) and produce the same if the matter is remanded back to the file of ld CIT(E). We are of the view that proper opportunity of being heard was not provided to the assessee and hence, in the interest of justice, we set aside the orders of CIT(E) and remit the issue back to the file of the CIT(E), who will examine all the details and assessee will comply with all the requirements. In term of the above, the orders of CIT(E) are set aside and matter restored back to his file for fresh consideration of registration u/s.12AB and 80G(5) of the Act. 7. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 24/07/2024. Sd/- sd/- (Manish Agarwal) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 24/07/2024 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) ITA Nos.234 & 235/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2025-2026 Page4 | 4 Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack 1. The Appellant : Bol Bum Seva Samiti, Plot No.3184, Puri By Pass Road, Pandra, Bhubaneswar 2. The Respondent: CIT (Exemptions), Hyderabad 3. Pr.CIT, 4. DR, ITAT, 5. Guard file. //True Copy//