Prakhar Education Trust, V. C.I.T.(Exemptions),

ITA 25/PAT/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9638 (ITAT-PATNA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-03-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 28-04-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARCHANA SINHA SR S C
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PATNA BENCH, PATNA BEFORE SH. N. K. SAINI, AM AND SH. AMIT SHUKLA , JM ITA NO. 25/PAT. /2015 : ASSTT. YEAR : PRAKHAR EDUCATION TRUST, FLAT NO. 402, BIRENDRA RESIDENCY, RAJ ENDRA NAGAR, PATNA - 800016 VS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), 2 ND FLOOR CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, BIRCHAND PATEL MARG, PATNA - 800001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. A ACTP5629E ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SMT. ARCHANA SINHA, SR. S.C. DATE OF HEARING : 05.03 .201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCE MENT : 05 .0 3 .201 8 ORDER PER N. K. SAINI, AM : THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 27.01.2015 OF LD. CIT( EXEMPTIONS ) , PATNA . 2 . DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING NOBODY WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NEITHER ANY ADJOURNMENT WAS SOUGHT. WE, THEREFORE, PROCEEDED EX - PARTE AND THE APPEAL HAS BEEN DECIDED AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD . SR. STANDING COUNSEL APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE DEPARTMENT. 3 . FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPLICATION IN FORM NO. 10A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ON 14.07.2014. THE LD. CIT(E) OBSERVED THAT THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 27.01.2014 WITH A DIRECTION TO PRODUCE REPLY TO THE QUERY RELATING TO THE PURCHASE OF LAND AMOUNTING TO RS.12,99,000/ - FROM SH. NABIN ITA NO . 25 /PAT. /201 5 PRAKHAR EDUCATION TRUST 2 KUMAR JHA, THE FOUNDER CUM CHAIRMAN OF THE TRUST - ON 19.01.2014. THE LD. CIT(E) MENTIONED THAT NOBODY APPEARED ON 27.01.2015 AND THE CASE WAS GOING TO BE BARRED BY LIMITATION ON 31.01.2015 AND REJECTED THE APPLICATION MOVED BY THE ASSESSEE. 4 . NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL. THE LD. SR. STANDING COUNSEL FOR THE DEPARTMENT SUPP ORTED THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(E). 5 . WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF LD. SR. STANDING COUNSEL FOR THE DEPARTMENT AND THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE LD. CIT(E) MENTIONED THAT THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 27.01.2014 AND NOBODY AP PEARED ON 27.01.2015, SO IT IS NOT CLEAR HOW THE PRESENCE WAS REQUIRED AFTER ONE YEAR. IT IS ALSO NOT MENTIONED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT THE NOTICE FOR HEARING WAS SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. IT IS WELL SETTLED THAT NOBODY SHOULD BE CONDEMNED UNHEARD AS PE R THE MAXIM AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM. WE, THEREFORE, CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO SET ASIDE THIS CASE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(E) TO BE ADJUDICATED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROVIDING DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 6 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . (ORDER P RONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 05 /03 /2018 ) SD/ - SD/ - ( AMIT SHUKLA ) (N. K. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 05 /0 3 /2018 *SUBODH*