Anil Salgaoncar Foundation, Panaji V. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Bangalore

ITA 322/PAN/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7000 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-01-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 29-11-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y V RAVIRAJ
• Assessee Lawyers: P J PARDIWALLA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Non compliance
• Section: 80G; 12A; 12AA; 27

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA , A M AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI , J M ITA NO S . 322 & 323 / PAN . / 2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2017 - 18 ) ANIL SALGAOCAR FOUNDATION SALGAOCAR BHAVAN, ALTINHO, PANAJI, GOA - 403 001 VS. CIT(EXEPTIONS) 6 TH FLOOR, UNIT BLD. ANNEX, P. KALINGA RAO ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 027 PAN/GIR NO. AAFTA 5327 B ( APPELLANT ) : ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : SHRI P. J. PARDIWALLA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI Y. V. RAVIRAJ DATE OF HEARING : 15.11.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03.01 .2019 O R D E R PER SHAMIM YAHYA, A. M.: THE S E ARE APPEAL S BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTIONS), BANGALORE , PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017 - 18 AGAINST THE REJECTION OF APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S. 12A AND 80G OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT FOR SHORT) RESPECTIVELY. 2. THE GROUND S RAISED IN ITA NO. 322 /PAN./2017 READS AS UNDER: 1. THE ORDER PASSED U/S. 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (ITA) BY THE LD. CIT(EXEMPTIONS) REJECTING APPELLANT'S APPLICATION SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S. 12A OF THE ITA IS VOID AB INITIO AS THE SAME IS PASSED WITHOUT GIVING ANY OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE APPELLANT. 2. THE LD. CIT (EXEMPTIONS) ERRED IN STATING THAT DETAILS/DOCUMENTS SOUGHT WERE NOT FURNISHED BY APPELLANT EVEN WHEN NO NOTICE WAS EVER GIVEN TO THE APPELLANT TO FURNISH ANY DETAILS. 3. THE LD. CIT(EXEMPTIONS) HAS PASSED THE ORDER IN HASTE AND IS AGAINST THE FACTS, LAWS AND PROVISIONS OF THE ITA AND RULES MADE THERE UNDER. 3. THE GROUNDS RAISED IN ITA NO. 323/PAN./2017 READS AS UNDER: 1. THE ORDER PASSED U/S. 80G(5)(VI) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (ITA) BY THE LD. CIT(EXEMPTIONS) REJECTING APPELLANT'S APPLICATION SEEKIN G RECOGNITION U/S. 80G OF THE ITA IS VOID AB INITIO AS THE SAME IS PASSED WITHOUT GIVING ANY OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE APPELLANT. 2 ITA NOS. 322 & 323/PAN./2017 2. THE LD. CIT(EXEMPTIONS) ERRED IN STATING THAT DETAILS/DOCUMENTS SOUGHT WERE NOT FURNISHED BY APPELLANT EVEN WHEN NO NOTICE WAS EVER GIVEN TO THE APPELLANT TO FURNISH ANY DETAILS. 3. THE LD. CIT ( EXEMPTIONS) HAS PASSED THE ORDER IN HASTE AND IS AGAINST THE FACTS, LAWS AND PROVISIONS OF THE ITA AND RULES MADE THERE UNDER. 4. IN THIS CASE, THE APPLICATION OF REGISTRATI ON U/S. 12A WAS REJECTED BY THE LD. CIT(A) BY OBSERVING AS UNDER: THE APPLICANT TRUST FILED APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A ON 27 - 03 - 2017. ON VERIFICATION OF THE SUBMISSION IT IS NOTICED THAT THERE IS INCONSISTENCIES/DEFICIENCY OF TRUST DEED IN RESPECT OF (A) AMENDMENT CLAUSE (B) BENEFICIARY CLAUSE AND (C) UTILIZATION CLAUSE. 2. IN ABSENCE OF DETAILS/DOCUMENTS SOUGHT, IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO ASCERTAIN THE GENUINENESS OF OBJECTS AND ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST THE NON COMPLIANCE INDICATES THAT THE ASSE SSEE IS NOT SERIOUS ENOUGH AND INTERESTED IN PROCESSING THE MATTER OF APPROVAL U/S 12A. 3. AT THE STAGE OF REGISTRATION U/S 12AA, THE COMMISSIONER IN RECEIPT OF AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF A TRUST OR INSTITUTION HAS TO SATISFY HIMSELF ABOUT THE OBJ ECTS OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION AND THE GENUINENESS OF ITS ACTIVITIES. IN THE ABSENCE OF RELEVANT DETAILS, IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO VERIFY THE GENUINENESS OF THE OBJECTS AND THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST IN THIS CASE . 5. THEREAFTER, THE LD. CIT(A) REFERRED TO SOME C ASE LAW S . HE FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT INTERESTED IN PROCESSING THE APPLICATION. ACCORDINGLY, HE REJ ECTED THE APPLICATION. SINCE THE APPLICATION U/S.12A WAS REJECTED, THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO REJECTED THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S .80 - G. 6. AGAINST THE ABOVE ORDER, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 7. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE COUNSEL AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT ISSUED ANY NOTICE WHATSOEVER A ND HAS SUMMARILY REJE CTED THE APPLICATIONS WITHOUT GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 8. PER CONTRA, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (LD. DR FOR SHORT) COULD NOT DISPUTE THE PROPOSITION THAT THE LD. CIT HAS NOT GIVEN THE ASSESSEE ANY OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 3 ITA NOS. 322 & 323/PAN./2017 9. UPON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION, WE NOTE THAT THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE HAVE BEEN CONTRAVENED IN THIS CASE INASMUCH AS THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. IT IS SETTLED LAW THAT EVEN ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS HAVE TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE RULES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. IN THIS REGARD, WE PLACE RELIANCE UPON THE DECISION OF HONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF M/S SAHARA INDIA (FARMS) VS. CIT & ANR . 300 ITR 403 (SC) . ACCORDINGLY, WE REMIT THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT. THE LD. CIT SHALL PASS A FRESH ORDER AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 10 . IN THE RESULT, T HE SE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. O RDER PRONOUNCED BY LISTING THE RESULT ON THE NOTICE BOARD OF THE BENCH UNDER RULE 34(4) OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963. SD/ - RAM LAL NEGI JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/ - SHAMIM YAHYA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 0 3 . 0 1 . 2 0 1 9 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : (1) THE ASSESSEE; (2) THE REVENUE; (3) THE CIT(A); (4) THE CIT, PANJI CITY CONCERNED; (5) THE DR, ITAT, PANJI ; (6) GUARD FILE . BY ORDER ROSHANI , SR. PS ( SR. P.S. / P.S. ) ITAT