JLPL Education Society, Mohali V. CIT (Exemptions), Chandigarh

ITA 325/CHANDI/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2433 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 15-12-2015
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 06-04-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PANKAJ BHALLA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 12A; 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. RANO JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.325/CHD/2015 (UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT) JLPL EDUCATION SOCIETY, VS. THE .C.I.T.(EXEMPTIONS), SCO 39-42, SECTOR 82, CHANDIGARH. MOHALI, PUNJAB. PAN: AABTJ6669B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI PANKAJ BHALLA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUSHIL KUMAR, CIT DR DATE OF HEARING : 15.12.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : .01.2016 O R D E R PER RANO JAIN, A.M . : THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AG AINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXE MPTIONS), CHANDIGARH DATED 28.1.2015, REJECTING THE APPLICATI ON OF THE ASSESSEE TO GRANT REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF TH E INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). 2. BRIEFLY, THE FACTS OF THE CASE, TO THE EXTENT RE LEVANT FOR ADJUDICATING THE PRESENT APPEAL, ARE THAT THE ASSES SEE IS A SOCIETY REGISTERED WITH THE REGISTRAR OF FIRM & SOCIETIES, PUNJAB. IT FILED AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT BEFORE THE 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH AS ON 23.7.2014. AFTER REFERRING IN DETAIL THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) REJ ECTED THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE FOR REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 28.1.2015. 3. AGGRIEVED BY THE SAID ORDER, THE ASSESSEE HAS C OME IN APPEAL BEFORE US. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, RE VISED GROUNDS OF APPEAL WERE FILED. A PRELIMINARY OBJECTION AS REGA RDS NO REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD, BEING PROVIDED BY THE L EARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) WAS RAISED AT THE OUTSET. THE SUBMISSION OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSES SEE WAS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION IN THE PRESCRIBED FORMAT BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA X (EXEMPTIONS). THE ACIT, CIRCLE 6(1), MOHALI VIDE H IS LETTER DATED 4.8.2014 CALLED FOR DOCUMENTS IN ORDER TO VERIFY TH E ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY. VARIOUS REPLIES WERE FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE, LATEST BEING THAT ON 27.8.2014. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), THEREAFTER CALLED FOR TO FILE RELEVAN T DOCUMENTS VIDE HIS LETTER DATED 1.12.2014 AND THE CASE WAS FIXED F OR 12.12.2014. ON THE SAID DATE, THE ASSESSEE FILED ALL THE REQUIR ED DOCUMENTS BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEM PTIONS). THE ORDER WAS PASSED ON 28.1.2015. IT WAS SUBMITTED TH AT NO OPPORTUNITY WAS PROVIDED OR SHOW CAUSE ISSUED TO TH E ASSESSEE BEFORE PASSING THE ORDER. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) NEITHER CONFRONTED ANY OF THE ISSUES R AISED BY HIM IN HIS ORDER, NOR SOUGHT FOR ANY CLARIFICATION IN THIS REGARD. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3 (EXEMPTIONS)EVEN DID NOT CONFRONT THE REMAND REPORT OF ACIT, CIRCLE 6(1), MOHALI ON THIS ISSUE, NOR WAS IT DISCU SSED IN HIS ORDER. IN THIS VIEW, IT WAS PRAYED TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS). RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON A NUMBER OF JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS IN THIS REGARD. 4. THE LEARNED D.R., DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, PRODUCED THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXS RECORDS IN ORIGINA L. IT WAS FAIRLY ADMITTED BY HIM THAT IN ALL FAIRNESS, A PROPER OPPO RTUNITY WAS NOT GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT ITS CASE BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS). 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS. ON PERUSA L OF THE ORDER SHEET ENTRIES IN THE FILE OF THE LEARNED COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), WE OBSERVE THAT THE CASE WAS FIXE D FOR THE FIRST TIME BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) AS ON 12.12.2014, ON WHICH DATE THE RE PRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE DULY APPEARED BEFORE HIM AND FILED THE REQUIRED EXPLANATION AND EVIDENCES. AFTER THIS DATE, NO CO RRESPONDENCE HAPPENED BETWEEN THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) AND THE ASSESSEE AND FINAL ORDER REJEC TING THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS PASSED ON 28.1.2015 . FURTHER FROM THE ORDER SHEET ENTRY DATED 11.9.2014, IT IS SEEN T HAT THE ACIT, RANGE-6, MOHALI HAD SENT SOME REPORT DATED 29.8.201 4, FOR THE PERUSAL OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTIONS). IT IS AN ADMITTED FACT THAT NEITHER A COPY OF THE S AME WAS PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE, NOR AN OPPORTUNITY TO REBUT THE SA ME WAS EVEN PROVIDED TO IT. IN VIEW OF THIS SEQUENCE OF EVENTS , WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT PROVIDED A FAIR AND REASONABLE 4 OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD AND FURTHER THE MATERIAL ON THE BASIS OF WHICH AN ADVERSE VIEW HAS BEEN FORMED AGAINST THE A SSESSEE HAS ALSO NOT BEEN CONFRONTED TO HIM. THIS IS A CLEAR CASE O F VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 6. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE FIND IT PROPER TO SEND THE CASE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INC OME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) TO CONSIDER THE SAME AS PER LAW AFTER GIVING ASSESSEE A FAIR AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 8 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2016. SD/- SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) (RANO JAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 8 TH JANUARY, 2016 *RATI* COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT(A)/THE CIT/THE DR. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5