Navi Vasahat Dharmada Trust, Dist.Bharuch V. The CIT-II, Baroda

ITA 282/AHD/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6172 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-05-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 17-05-2010
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 24-01-2008
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR JAYANT JAVERI
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH A BEFORE SHRI G.D.AGRAWAL, VICE-PRESIDENT (AZ) AND SHRI MUKUL SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DATE OF HEARING : 17/05/2010 DRAFTED ON:17/0 5/2010 ITA NO.282/AHD/2008 ASSESSMENT YEAR : -- NAVI VASAHAT DHARMAD TRUST AT & POST CHASVAD NETRANG DIST.BHARUCH VS. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-II BARODA PAN/GIR NO. : AAATN7634H (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : -NONE- RESPONDENT BY: DR. JAYANT JAVERI, SR. D.R. O R D E R PER SHRI MUKUL SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL AT THE BEHEST OF THE ASSESSEE WH ICH HAS EMANATED FROM THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT-III DATED 20 /11/2007 PASSED U/S.12AA(1)(B)(II) READ WITH SECTION 12A(A) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. 1.1. THE ORDER PASSED U/S.12AA(1)(B)(II) DATED 20.11.200 7 PASSED BY THE CIT-III, BARODA, REJECTING THE APPLIC ATION FOR REGISTRATION UNDER I.T. ACT BY THE APPELLANT TRUST IS WHOLLY ILLEGAL, UNLAWFUL AND AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF NAT URAL JUSTICE. 1.2. THE LD. CIT HAS GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACT S IN NOT ALLOWING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT TR UST BEFORE REJECTING ITS APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U NDER THE ACT. ITA NO.282/AHD/2008 NAVI VASAHAT DHARMADA TRUST VS. CIT-II - 2 - 2.1. THE LD. CIT HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THERE WAS A SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR FAILURE TO ATTEND/COMPLY WITH THE DETAILS CALLED FOR VIDE LETTER DT. 16.10.07. 2.2. THAT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS WELL AS IN LAW, THE LD. CIT OUGHT TO HAVE ALLOWED REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT. 2.3. THE LD. CIT HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE TAX C ONSULTANT OF THE APPELLANT TRUST HAD FILED ON 19.11.2007 ADJO URNMENT APPLICATION DATED 15.11.2007 IN RESPONSE TO THE NOT ICE OF HEARING DT. 29.10.07 WHICH HAS BEEN TOTALLY IGNORED BY THE CIT-III, BARODA AND PASSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THER EBY VIOLATING THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 2. IT IS WORTH TO MENTION THAT ON THE DATE OF HEARI NG, NO ONE WAS PRESENT FROM THE SIDE OF THE APPELLANT, HOWEVER, CO NSIDERING THE BREVITY OF THE MATTER, WE HAVE DECIDED TO PROCEED WITH THIS APPEAL EX-PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE, AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTA L REPRESENTATIVE. 3. ON CAREFUL READING OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER PASSED U/S.12AA(1)(B)(II) READ WITH SECTION 12A(A) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961, IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE APPLICANT HAS MOVED AN APPLI CATION ON 31/05/2007 SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S.12A(A) OF THE I.T. ACT, 19 61. THE APPELLANT/APPLICANT WAS ASKED TO FURNISH CERTAIN DE TAILS AS WELL AS DOCUMENTS. THE LD. COMMISSIONER HAS REPRODUCED TH E LIST OF THOSE DOCUMENTS WHICH WERE DEMANDED FROM THE APPLICANT. THEREAFTER, THE LD. COMMISSIONER HAS NOTED THAT THOUGH THE SAID NOT ICE WAS SERVED BY SPEED POST BUT NO COMPLIANCE WAS MADE. THE LD. CO MMISSIONER HAS ALSO MENTIONED THAT EVEN THEREAFTER THE REQUISITE I NFORMATION WAS NOT ITA NO.282/AHD/2008 NAVI VASAHAT DHARMADA TRUST VS. CIT-II - 3 - FURNISHED. IN THE ABSENCE OF THOSE DOCUMENTS, AS PER LD. COMMISSIONER, IT WAS DIFFICULT TO HOLD THAT THE ASSESSEES TRUST WAS A GENUINE CHARITABLE TRUST. THUS, IT WAS FINALLY HELD THAT THE TRUST C OULD NOT BE SAID TO BE IN CONFIRMITY WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE I.T. ACT, AS A RESULT, THE REGISTRATION SOUGHT U/S.12A(A) OF THE I.T. ACT, 196 1 WAS REJECTED. 4. NOW BEFORE US, A COMPILATION HAS BEEN FILED CONT AINING 28 PAGES DATED 28/04/2008 THROUGH WHICH THE APPELLANT HAS PL ACED COPY OF APPLICATION OF FORM NO.10A, NOTICES ISSUED BY THE R EVENUE DEPARTMENT AND ADJOURNMENT SOUGHT, A COPY OF REGISTRATION CERT IFICATE AND THE ANNUAL ACCOUNTS FOR FEW YEARS WERE FURNISHED. IT IS EVIDENT AND NOT IN DISPUTE EVEN FROM THE SIDE OF THE APPELLANT THAT TH E REQUISITE DETAILS AS DEMANDED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER WERE EVER FURNISHE D BEFORE HIM. THERE WAS NO DENIAL OF THIS FACT THAT THERE WAS NON -COMPLIANCE FROM THE SIDE OF THE APPLICANT. FOR THE SAID NON-ATTENDANC E REASONS COULD BE MANY, BUT NOW THIS APPELLANT IS FURNISHING THOSE D ETAILS THROUGH A COMPILATION REFERRED SUPRA. CONSIDERING THIS SITUA TION, WHEN THE APPELLANT IS WILLING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENT S AND ALSO EXPRESSED HIS WILLINGNESS TO COMPLY WITH THE OTHER NOTICES, W E DEEM IT PROPER AND JUSTIFIABLE TO RESTORE ALL SUCH GROUNDS BACK TO LD. COMMISSIONER TO BE DECIDED DE NOVO AS PER RULES, NEEDLESS TO SAY, AFTER PROVIDING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESS EE. SIMULTANEOUSLY, WE HEREBY DIRECT THIS APPELLANT TO SUO MOTO APPROAC H THE LD. COMMISSIONER WITHIN 15 DAYS ON RECEIPT OF THIS ORDE R AND FURNISH NECESSARY INFORMATION SO THAT THE OLD PENDING MATTE R OF REGISTRATION MUST GET RESOLVED AT AN EARLY DATE. ITA NO.282/AHD/2008 NAVI VASAHAT DHARMADA TRUST VS. CIT-II - 4 - 5. IN THE RESULT, FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES, THIS AP PEAL MAY BE TREATED AS ALLOWED. ORDER SIGNED, DATED AND PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 21 ST MAY 2010. SD/- SD/- ( G.D.AGRAWAL ) ( MUKUL SHRAWAT ) VICE PRESIDENT (AZ) JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 21/ 05 /2010 T.C. NAIR, SR. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS)-CONCERNED 5. THE DR, AHMEDABAD BENCH 6. THE GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR), ITAT, AHMEDABAD