Matrdham Hanemann Sansthan, CHITTORGARH V. CIT (Exemption), JAIPUR

ITA 274/JODH/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1954 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 02-05-2017
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 08-08-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ALKA R JAIN
• Assessee Lawyers: NITESH SHARMA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 80G; 263; 12

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.274/JODH/2016 UNDER SECTION 12AA(1)(B) MATRDHAM HANEMANN SANSTHAN VS. CIT(EXEMPTION) C/O. NITESH SHARMA & COM 15/16 JAIPUR KANCHAN NAGAR, NIMBAHER CHITTORGARH PAN NO. AAABM0244L (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI. NITESH SHARMA RESPONDENT BY : SMT. ALKA R. JAIN DATE OF HEARING : 02/05/2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05/05/2017 ORDER PER DIVA SINGH, JM BY THE PRESENT APPEAL THE ASSESSEE ASSAILS THE CORR ECTNESS OF THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 12AA(1)(B) PASSED BY LD. CIT(E), JAIP UR. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE REGISTRY HAS POINTED OUT VARIOUS DEFECTS IN THE PRE SENT APPEAL SOME OF THEM BEING THAT THE ORDER UNDER CHALLENGE IN COLUMN NO. 5 IN FORM NO. 36 I.E; MEMO OF APPEAL IS SHOWN TO BE UNDER SECTION 263 OF THE I NCOME TAX ACT. IN THE RELIEF CLAIMED THE DENIAL OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12 AA AND EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 80G IS PRAYED FOR. THE APPEAL HAS BEEN FILE D ON 08/08/2016 WHEREIN THE REGISTRY HAS COMMUNICATED VIDE NOTICE DT. 22/09/201 6 THAT SEPARATE APPEALS ARE REQUIRED TO BE FILED FOR SEPARATE ORDERS. TILL DATE THE DEFECT REMAINS UNADDRESSED. AT THE TIME OF HEARING LD. AR FILED CO PY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL WITHOUT ANY SUBMISSION THAT THE ORIGINAL GROUNDS BE SUBSTITUTED OR MODIFIED. 2 HOWEVER SINCE THE DEFECT REMAINS NOT CURED, THE LD. AR WAS REQUIRED TO ADDRESS WHICH ORDER IS UNDER CHALLENGE IN THE PRESENT PROCE EDINGS IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EXPLANATION, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISM ISSED IN LIMINI. BY NOT CURING THE DEFECT IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSES SEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED. ACCORDINGLY THE APPEAL OF THE ASS ESSEE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINI. 2. BEFORE PARTING IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON REPR ESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING AND IT UNDERTAKES TO ADDRESS THE DEFECT POI NTED OUT BY THE REGISTRY, IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY, IF SO ADVISED TO PRAY FOR A RE CALL OF THIS ORDER. THE SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEA RING ITSELF. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINI. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED ON 05/05/2017 IN THE OPEN C OURT. SD/- SD/- (B.C. MEENA) (DIVA SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 05/05/2017 AG COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR