IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH B NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI AND SHRI K.D. RANJAN ITA NO. 3431/DEL/2011 EXTENSIBLE BUSINESS REPORTING VS. DIRECTOR OF INC OME TAX LANGUAGE (XBRL) ICAI BHAWAN, (EXEMPTION), NEW DEL HI. INDRAPRASTHA MARG, NEW DELHI. PAN/GIR NO. AACCE5626P (APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : SHRI RAJESH JAIN CA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SALIL MISHRA SR. DR O R D E R PER R.P. TOLANI, J.M : THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF DI RECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI DATED 4-5-2011, PASSED U/S 1 2AA(1)(B) READ WITH SEC. 12A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, REJECTING ASS ESSEES APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION. SOLE GROUND RAISED IS AS UNDER: THAT THE LEARNED DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION ) ERRED IN NOT ALLOWING REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. 2. BRIEF FACTS ARE THAT ASSESSEE IS A COMPANY PROMO TED BY THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA (ICAI) U/S 25 OF T HE COMPANIES ACT, 1956. IT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED TO PROMOTE AND ENCOURAGE TH E ADOPTION OF EXTENSIBLE BUSINESS REPORTING LANGUAGE (XBRL) IN INDIA AS TH E STANDARD FOR ELECTRONIC BUSINESS REPORTING IN INDIA. 2.1. THE ASSESSEE FILED APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATIO N U/S 12AA ALONG WITH NECESSARY DOCUMENTS. THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EX EMPTION) CALLED THE ASSESSEE TO FILE CERTAIN DOCUMENT, WHICH, ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE, WERE SUBMITTED ALONG WITH DOCUMENTS ON 25-2-2011. THEREA FTER THE LEARNED 2 DIT(E) WITHOUT CALLING FOR FURTHER INFORMATION AND WITHOUT GIVING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD, REJECTED THE APPLICATIO N OF THE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS BEFORE US. 3. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDS THAT T HE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS WERE SUBMITTED TO DIT(E) ON 25-2-2011: COPY OF MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION AND REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE FROM THE REGISTRAR FOR VERIFICATION. NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE FROM THE INSTITUTE OF CHAR TERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA FOR USING THEIR OFFICE SPARE F OR ITS BUSINESS PURPOSES. DETAILS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COMPANY. UNDERTAKING FROM THE DIRECTOR OF THE COMPANY DECLAR ING THAT THERE SHALL NOT BE ANY INFRINGEMENT TO THE FIRST PR OVISO TO SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT. THE APPELLANT COMPANY ALSO SUBMITTED THAT SINCE IT IS THE FIRST YEAR OF INCORPORATION OF THE COMPANY, THE REQUIREME NT OF IT RETURN IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THEM. FURTHER THE APPEL LANT COMPANY ALSO STATED THAT IT HAD NOT RECEIVED DONATIONS SINC E ITS INCORPORATION. ICAI HAS CONTRIBUTED RS. 10 LAKHS FO R MEETING ITS DAY TO DAY EXPENSES. 3.1. DESPITE FILING OF ABOVE DOCUMENTS THE DIT(E) I NFERRED THAT ASSESSEE COULD NOT JUSTIFY WITH DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE THE GEN UINENESS OF ITS CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES. BESIDES, SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD, THE PRINCIPLES OF NATUR AL JUSTICE STAND VIOLATED AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE THE IMPUGNED ORDER M AY BE SET ASIDE, RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF DIT(E) TO PASS AN APPROPRIATE O RDER AFTER AFFORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSES SEE. 3 4. LEARNED DR IS HEARD. 5. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES NARRATED ABOVE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD HAVE BEEN GIVEN M ORE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. IN VIEW TH4EREOF WE SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED O RDER, RESTORE BACK TO THE FILE OF DIT(E) TO DECIDE THE APPLICATION OF THE ASS ESSEE AFRESH, AFTER AFFORDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 6. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 01-09-2011. SD/- SD/- (K.D. RANJAN ) ( R.P. TOLANI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 01-09-2011. MP COPY TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. AO 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR