, , , , A, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD, A BENCH . .. . . .. . , !' !' !' !', , , , #$ %&'( #$ %&'( #$ %&'( #$ %&'(, , , , )* + ) ' )* + ) ' )* + ) ' )* + ) ' BEFORE S/SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT AND ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA NO.2635/AHD/2012 JYOT EDUCATION FOUNDATION F/70, RAMESHWAR FLATS FATEHPURA, NEW VIKAS GRUH ROAD PALDI, AHMEDABAD 380 007. PAN : AABTJ 5019 P /VS. DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTION) AHMEDABAD. ( (( (-. -. -. -. / APPELLANT) ( (( (/0-. /0-. /0-. /0-. / RESPONDENT) 1& 2 3 )/ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI TUSHAR P. HEMANI + 2 3 )/ REVENUE BY : SHRI SUBHASH BAINS, CIT-DR 5 2 &(*/ DATE OF HEARING : 22 ND AUGUST, 2013 678 2 &(*/ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 5.9.2013 )9 / O R D E R PER G.C. GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTIONS), AHMEDABAD DATED 24.09.2012. 2. THE GROUNDS OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER: 1. THE LD DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), AHME DABAD (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS DIT) HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL U/S . 80G(5) OF THE ITA NO.2635/AHD/2012 -2- INCOME TAX ACT ON THE GROUND THAT THE APPELLANT HAS NOT FURNISHED THE DETAILS CALLED FOR VIDE LETTER DT. 14 -09-2012 AND THUS, FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THIS IS TH E FIRST YEAR OF THE APPELLANT (DT. OF INCORPORATION BEING 18-06-2011) A ND MAJORITY OF THE DETAILS WERE ALREADY PLACED ON RECORD ALONGW ITH THE APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL U/S. 80G(5). 2. THE LD. DIT HAS GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN PASSING THE ORD ER WITHOUT GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD WH ICH IS EVIDENT FROM THE FACT THAT THE LETTER DT. 14-09-201 2 CALLING FOR INFORMATION AND THE ORDER U/S. 80G(5) REJECTING THE APPLICATION WAS SERVED BY THE OFFICE OF THE ID. DIT ON 26-09-20 12. 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED T HAT DIT(EXEMPTIONS) HAS PASSED EX PARTE ORDER REJECTING THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE FOR REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 80G(5) OF THE ACT. HE SUBMITTED THAT NO PROPER OPPORTUNIT Y WAS ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE AS THE LETTER DATED 14.9.2012 OF TH E DIT (EXEMPTIONS) CALLING FOR CERTAIN INFORMATION WAS SE RVED ON THE ASSESSEE LATE ON 26.9.2012, AND BY THAT TIME, THE O RDER REJECTING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WAS PASSED. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE BE ALLOWED OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING AND TO P LACE RELEVANT INFORMATION, AS MAY BE REQUIRED BY THE DIT(EXEMPTIO NS). THE LEARNED CIT-DR HAS RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE DIT(E XEMPTIONS). 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE ORDER OF THE DIT(EXEMPTION). WE FIND THAT THE DIT( E) HAS PASSED EX PARTE ORDER AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. NOTICE OF HEARING DATED 14.9.12 CALLING FOR CERTAIN INFORMATION WAS S ERVED ON THE ASSESSEE BY THE OFFICE OF THE DIT(E) LATE ON 26.9.1 2. IN THESE FACTS OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT IN ACCOR DANCE WITH THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE, IT SHALL BE REASONAB LE TO RESTORE THE ITA NO.2635/AHD/2012 -3- ISSUE IN THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE FILE OF THE DIT(EXEMPTIONS) WITH DIRECTION TO PASS DE NOVO ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW ON MERIT, AFTER GIVING DUE OPPO RTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO COOPERATE IN THE MATTER OF DISPOSAL OF ITS APPLICATION UNDER SEC TION 80G(5) OF THE ACT. WE DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONE D HEREINABOVE. SD/- SD/- ( %&'( %&'( %&'( %&'( / ANIL CHATURVEDI) )* + )* + )* + )* + /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( . .. . . .. . /G.C. GUPTA) !' !' !' !' /VICE-PRESIDENT C OPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1) : APPELLANT 2) : RESPONDENT 3) : CIT(A) 4) : CIT CONCERNED 5) : DR, ITAT. BY ORDER DR/AR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD