Abhinav Bindra Foundation Trust, Mohali V. CIT(Exemptions), Chandigarh

ITA 238/CHANDI/2023

AI Insights

The case involves the Abhinav Bindra Foundation Trust appealing against the orders of the CIT (Exemptions), Chandigarh, which had rejected their applications for registration under sections 12AB and 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Trust argued that the rejection was made without a reasonable opportunity of being heard and that the orders were non-speaking. The Tribunal found that the CIT (Exemptions) had dismissed the appeals based solely on non-prosecution without considering the merits or the material on record. Consequently, the Tribunal remanded the matter for a fresh decision, emphasizing the need for a fair hearing and consideration of the case on its merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 127820 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-05-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 01-05-2023
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Appeal Filed On: 23-04-2023
• Other Referred Cases: S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 12A; 12AA

Judgement Text

आयकर अपील य अ धकरण,च डीगढ़ यायपीठ, च डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘B’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos. 238 & 239/Chd/2023 नधा रण वष / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Abhinav Bindra Foundation Trust, Plot No. 107, Sector 82, SAS Nagar, Punjab Vs. बनाम The CIT (Exemptions), Chandigarh थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AACTA7058G अपीलाथ /Appellant यथ /Respondent नधा रती क ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CA राज व क ओर से/ Revenue by : Sh. Vivek Nangia, CIT DR स ु नवाई क तार$ख/Date of Hearing : 02.05.2023 उदघोषणा क तार$ख/Date of Pronouncement : 03.05.2023 आदेश/Order Per Vikram Singh Yadav, Accountant Member: These are Assessee’s appeals against the respective orders each dated 31.01.2023 of the ld. CIT (Exemptions), Chandigarh for A.Y. 2021-22. 2. There is a delay of 23 days in filing the appeals. The Assessee, vide its two Applications for condonation of delay, both dated 24.4.2023 submitted that the delay in filing the appeals was caused as the rejection orders passed by ld. CIT(E) never came to the knowledge of the Assessee; that the rejection orders were not served physically and the Assessee came to know about it at the time of a 238 & 239-Chd-2023 – Abhinav Bindra Foundation Trust, SAS Nagar. 2 routine visit at the portal of the Department. As soon as the Assessee came to know about the passing of the aforesaid orders, copies of the impugned orders dated 17.4.2023 were immediately downloaded and then the Assessee filed the appeals before the ITAT. The Assessee, in the light of the above facts has prayed that the delay in filing the above appeals may be condoned and also undertake that it will fully cooperate for the early disposal of the subject appeals. In support of the above averments, the Assessee also filed affidavits on record. A request has been made to condone the delay in filing both the appeals. 3. We have considered the facts and reasoning furnished by the Assessee. In view of the detailed explanation and reasoning given by the Assessee, which has been supported by the Affidavits furnished by the Assessee, finding that the Assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the Appeals in time, and keeping in view the principle of natural justice, the delay of 23 days in filing the appeals is condoned. 4. Since the issues involved in both the appeals are identical, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. The Assessee in ITA No. 238/Chd/2023 has taken following grounds of appeal: 238 & 239-Chd-2023 – Abhinav Bindra Foundation Trust, SAS Nagar. 3 ITA No.238/Chd/2023 1. That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the Worthy CIT(E) has erred in rejecting the application of the appellant for Registration u/s 12AB even when the appellant was fully eligible: for the same. 2. That on law, facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by Worthy CIT(E) deserves to be quashed since the same has been passed without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 3. That the appellant craves leave for any addition, deletion or amendment in the grounds of appeal on or before the disposal of the same. 5. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the Assessee filed an application for registration u/s 12A (1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act') on 16.09.2022. In order to examine and verify the objects of the Assessee Trust and the genuineness of its activities, a detailed questionnaire was issued electronically to the Assessee on 07.11.2022 requiring the Assessee to furnish the details and documents on-line through e-proceedings on e-filing portal, by 22.11.2022. However, the Assessee neither furnished any submissions nor requested for adjournment in this behalf. Later on, opportunities were also granted on the Assessee through letter issued on 19.01.2023 for furnishing reply by the date fixed, i.e., 23.01.2023 and thereafter, a final opportunity was afforded to the Assessee vide letter dated 24.01.2023, fixing the matter on 30.01.2023. However, 238 & 239-Chd-2023 – Abhinav Bindra Foundation Trust, SAS Nagar. 4 no compliance in any form was made by the Assessee on the aforesaid occasions. The ld. CIT (E) observed that in the absence of any submissions made by the Assessee, it is very difficult to verify both the nature of objects and the genuineness of the activities of the applicant and concluded that the queries raised had not been answered satisfactorily by the Assessee. The ld. CIT(E), by placing reliance on various case laws, has rejected the application of the Assessee for registration u/s 12AB of the Act, observing that this rejection and consequent lack of registration will apply for the F.Y. 2022-23 onwards and will also supersede any registration granted u/s 12AB or 12AA of the Act by any authority at any earlier time. 6. At the outset, it has been submitted by the ld. Counsel for the Assessee that the ld. CIT(E) has dismissed the appeal of the Assessee without going into the merits of the case and even without considering the material available on record. It has further been submitted that the order passed by the ld. CIT(E) is a non-speaking order. It is prayed that keeping in view the principles of natural justice, the Assessee may be given a reasonable opportunity of hearing of the appeal before the ld. CIT(E) and the appeal may be directed to be decided on merits. 7. The ld. DR, on the other hand, has placed reliance on the order of the ld. CIT(E). 238 & 239-Chd-2023 – Abhinav Bindra Foundation Trust, SAS Nagar. 5 8. Heard. We have gone through the order of the ld. CIT(E), wherein, the appeal of the Assessee has been dismissed merely on the basis of the non-prosecution by relying on various decisions. We find that the ld. CIT (E), Chandigarh has dismissed the appeal without considering the material available on record, as also without going into the merits of the case. As such, an opportunity of hearing requires to be given to the assessee to represent his case fully before the ld. CIT(E). Even otherwise, it is trite [‘S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT’ 83 ITR 683 (Mad.)] and incumbent on the authority to decide an appeal on merit. 9. In view of the above, finding force in the grievance raised by the Assessee, the matter is remitted to the file of the ld. CIT (E), to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee, no doubt, shall cooperate in the fresh proceedings before the ld. CIT (E). All pleas available under the law shall remain so available to the assessee. Ordered accordingly. ITA No. 239/Chd/2022 10. The Assessee in this appeal has taken following grounds of appeal: 1. That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the Worthy CIT(E) has erred in rejecting registration application moved u/s 80G(5) even when the appellant was eligible for the same. 238 & 239-Chd-2023 – Abhinav Bindra Foundation Trust, SAS Nagar. 6 2. That on law, facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by Worthy CIT(E) deserves to be quashed since the same has been passed without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 3. That the appellant craves leave for any addition, deletion or amendment in the grounds of appeal on or before the disposal of the same. 11. The Assessee filed an application dated 29.09.2022 for approval under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act. The ld. CIT(E), however, rejected the registration application moved under section 80G(5) vide order dated 31.01.2023 in the absence of any submissions from the Assessee by observing that it is not possible to ascertain the objects and activities carried out by the Assessee without going into merits of the case. 12. Our findings recorded while disposing of ITA No. 238/Chd/2023 are mutatis-mutandis, squarely applicable to the present appeal also and this appeal is also disposed in the same terms. 13. In the result, for statistical purposes, both the appeals are treated as allowed. Order pronounced on 03.05.2023. Sd/- Sd/- ( A.D. JAIN ) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) Vice President Accountant Member Dated : 03.05.2023 “आर.के.” 238 & 239-Chd-2023 – Abhinav Bindra Foundation Trust, SAS Nagar. 7 आदेश क त*ल+प अ,े+षत / Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. यथ / The Respondent 3. आयकर आय ु 1त/ CIT 4. +वभागीय त न5ध, आयकर अपील$य आ5धकरण, च7डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड फाईल/ Guard File आदेशान ु सार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar