Barbarik Sewa Dham, Kolkata V. Director of Income Tax (Exemption)-1, Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 270/KOL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7969 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-03-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 09-02-2010
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K PRAMANIK
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside
• Section: 80G

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'B BENCH : KOLKATA (BEFORE HONBLE SRI D.K.TYAGI, J.M. AND HONBLE S RI B.K.HALDAR, A.M.) I.T.A. NO. 270/KOL/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : BARBARIK SEWA DHAM VS. DIT (EXEMPT ION), HQRS, KOLKATA (PAN NO. AABTB 0157 A ) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SR I PAWAN KUMAR AGARWAL. RESPONDENT BY : SRI A.K.PRAMANIK. O R D E R PER SHRI B.K.HALDAR, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE DIT(EXEMPTION), HQRS, KOLKATA DATED 05.11.09 REJEC TING THE RENEWAL OF EXEMPTION U/S 80G(5)(VI) . 2. THE APPEAL IS DELAYED BY TWO DAYS. AFTER HEARIN G BOTH THE SIDES WE CONDONE THE DELAY AND ADMIT THE APPEAL. 3. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL : 1. THAT THE LEARNED DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEM PTION) WAS UNJUSTIFIED IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR RENEW AL OF THE EXEMPTION U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF THE I.T.ACT WITHOUT ANY COGENT R EASON ALTHOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS FULFILLED ALL THE CONDITIONS LAID DOW N U/S 80G AND SHE FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT HER PREDECESSOR IN OFFICE HAD ALLOWED THE SAME EXEMPTION U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF THE I.T.ACT TO THE APPLICANT TRUST VIDE CERTIFICATE DATED 30.06.2005 FOR THE PERIOD F ROM 27.12.2005 TO 31.03.2009 AND THERE IS NO CHANGE IN FACTS. AS PE R THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF SONEPAT 2 HINDU EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE SOCIETY VS CIT, 2 78 ITR 262, IF REGISTRATION IS GRANTED U/S 12A, 80G EXEMPTION CA NNOT BE DENIED. 2. THAT THE LEARNED DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEM PTION) WAS UNJUSTIFIED IN PASSING AN EX PARTE ORDER WITHO UT AFFORDING ADEQUATE AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD . DELAY FOR ONE DAY MAY BE CONDONED. 3. THAT THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED D.I.(EXEMPTIO N) IS BASED ON WRONG APPRECIATION OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND IS BAD I N LAW. 4. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER , AMEND OR WITHDRAW ANY GROUND OR GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR AT THE T IME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 4. AT THE TIME OF HEARING AN ADJOURNMENT PETITION HAS BEEN FILED BY THE TRUSTEE OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST WHICH WAS REJECTED B Y THE BENCH AND THE CASE WAS HEARD. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED D.R. AND PERUSED THE RECORD. IN GROUND NO. 2 THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED THAT THE LEARNED DIT( EXEMPTION) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN PASSING AN EX-PARTE ORDER. WE FIND TH AT ONLY ONE NOTICE FOR 20.10.09 WAS ISSUED BY THE DIT(EXEMPTION) AND THE SAME WAS NOT SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. THE POSTAL REMARK ON THE SAME WAS A LWAYS CLOSED. IN THE ABOVE CIRCUMSTANCES WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINIO N THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ABLE TO PUTFORTH ITS CASE BEFORE THE LEARNED DIT(EXEMPTION). WE , THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LEAR NED DIT(EXEMP) AND REMIT THE MATTER TO HIS FILE WITH A DIRECTION THAT FRESH ORDER BE PASSED AS PER LAW AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE ADEQUATE OPPORTU NITY OF BEING HEARD. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 3 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12.03.2010 SD/- SD/- (D.K.TYAGI) (B.K.HALDAR ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 12.03.2010 COPY FORWARDED TO :- 1)DIT, EXEMPTION, HQRS. , KOLKATA. 2) BARBARIK SEWA DHAM, ROOM NO. 506, 21, HEMANTA B ASU SARANI,KOL. 3) CIT(A), KOLKATA. 4) CIT, KOLKATA. 5) D.R., ITAT, KOLKATA. (TRUE COPY) BY OR DER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR BCD I.T.AT., KOLKATA.