Hajivasa Mulla Sadak Masjid, Surat V. CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad

ITA 357/SRT/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7119 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-05-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 16-05-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 31-03-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AASHISH POPHARE
• Assessee Lawyers: SURESH K. KABRA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 12A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.357/SRT/2024 (Assessment Year: 2024-25) (Physical Hearing) Hajivasa Mulla Sadak Masjid, 1/1947, Jamrukh Gali, Nanpura, Surat – 395001. Vs. The CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad èथायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AACTH4572L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Suresh K. Kabra, CA Respondent by Shri Aashish Pophare, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 17/05/2024 Date of Pronouncement 21/05/2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, AM: This appeal emanates from the order dated 13.12.2022 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad [in short, “the Ld. CIT(E)”], wherein Ld. CIT(E) rejected assessee’s application filed in Form No.10AB under section 12AB of the Act on 13.06.2022 and provisional registration was also cancelled. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows: “1. The Ld CIT(E) was not just and proper on the facts of the case and in law in rejecting the application of the Trust for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii). 2. PRAYER 2.1 The Rejection order may be recalled and registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) may be directed to be allowed to the appellant. 2.2 Personal hearing may be granted. 2 ITA Nos.357/SRT/2024 Hajivasa Mulla Sadak Masjid 2.3 Any other relief that your honours may deem fit may be granted. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete any or all of the above grounds of appeal.” 3. The appeal filed by the assessee is barred by 415 days. The assessee has filed an affidavit for delay in filing of appeal before this Tribunal. In the affidavit, it has been stated that the assessee-trust is a registered trust under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 with the Charity Commissioner Office at Baroda, under Registration No.B-901, dated 20.10.1995. The assessee-trust applied registration before Ld. CIT(E) u/s 12A of the Act. The Ld. CIT(E) ask to the assessee-trust to file requisite documents. The trust did not receive notice due to wrong E-mail ID. It is stated that the primary E- Mail ID registered was [e-mail], whereas the notices were sent to an unregistered E-mail ID i.e. [e-mail]. The Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application of the assessee-trust dated 13.12.2022 for want of submission. Subsequently, the assessee-trust management filed a letter before the Ld. CIT(E) to allow opportunity to reopen the case. Despite lapse of one year from the letter filed, no such communication was received from the Ld. CIT(E). The assessee-trust then discussed the matter with the Tax Consultant/CA, who advised it to file appeal before this Tribunal to reopen the proceedings. 4. The reasons for non-submission of various evidence and supporting documents in response to the queries raised by the Ld. CIT(E), was that the 3 ITA Nos.357/SRT/2024 Hajivasa Mulla Sadak Masjid trust did not receive the notices which was due to wrong e-mail ID. As per portal profile, the e-mail ID registered with [e-mail] whereas the notices were sent on [e-mail]. Since, the assessee-trust did not receive the notices; it could not file the relevant details required for consideration for grant of registration. The assessee-trust prayed the delay may be condoned in the interest of justice. 5. On the other hand, Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax - Departmental Representative (Ld. CIT-DR) for the Revenue opposed the prayer of the assessee for condonation of delay. On merits, he has supported the order of the Ld. CIT(E). 6. We have considered the reasons given by the Learned Authorized Representative (Ld. AR) of the assessee and perused with the accompanied documents along with the affidavit. It is seen that the notices were not issued on the registered E-mail ID [e-mail] but were issued to e-mail ID [e-mail]. Further, the assessee filed a letter dated 09.01.2023 to reconsider the case to reopen the case before Ld. CIT(E) but it did not receive any reply. Thereafter, the assessee-trust met a Senior Chartered Accountant who advised them to file an appeal before ITAT and request for condonation of delay. We find that the delay in filing the appeal was not deliberate and intentional. We are satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal within 4 ITA Nos.357/SRT/2024 Hajivasa Mulla Sadak Masjid the time allowed u/s 253(3) of the Act. Hence, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 7. The fact of the case in brief are that the assessee filed an application for registration/incorporation in Form No.10AB u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act on 13.06.2022. The assessee-trust had been granted order for provisional approval in Form No.10AC issued on 08.02.2022 under clause (vi) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A of the Act for the period commencing from AY.2022-23 to AY.2024-25. In respect of the application filed by the assessee-trust in Form No.10AB, the assessee-trust was asked to file details and documents vide notice dated 07.11.2022 and 28.11.2022. Against the said notices, the assessee has not filed any response. Further, Ld. CIT(E) observed that the name of the assessee-trust as per PAN database is “Hajivasa Mulla Sadak Masjid”, whereas in PTR and Registration Certificate the name of the trust was mentioned as “Haji Vasa Mulla Ni Masjid”. Against the said notices, the assessee has not filed any response. Despite the apparent mismatch in the name in different document, the applicant was not submitted requisite details. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(E) could not verify the objects as well as activities of the assessee-trust. Thus, the genuineness of the activities was not established due to non-compliance of the assessee. The Ld. CIT(E) further provided opportunity to the assessee for compliance on or before 28.11.2022. In absence of requisite details on 5 ITA Nos.357/SRT/2024 Hajivasa Mulla Sadak Masjid the said date, the application for registration of assessee-trust was rejected by the Ld. CIT(E) based on material available on record. 8. At the outset, Ld. AR of the assessee assailed the ex parte order by Ld. CIT(E) on account of violation of principles of natural justice. He submits that the assessee had not received the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(E) on 07.11.2022 or 28.11.2022 and hence, the assessee could not file the documents and evidences before Ld. CIT(E). Therefore, Ld. AR requested that an opportunity to plead its case before the ld. CIT(E) may be granted to the assessee in the interests of justice and fair play. 9. On the other hand, Learned Commissioner of Income-tax - Departmental Representative (Ld. CIT-DR) for the Revenue did not have any objection if the matter is remitted back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. 10. We have head both the parties and perused the material available on record. The Ld. CIT(E) issued two notices but there was no compliance from the assessee. The Ld. CIT(E) has observed that the assessee failed to file documentary evidence to enable him to satisfy about the genuineness of the activities of the trust and whether the activities are in consonance with the objects of the trust. The Ld. AR has contended before us that the assessee is ready to submit all details and evidences needed by the Ld. CIT(E) and an opportunity may be given to present its case. We find that assessee could not pursue his case before the Ld. CIT(E) by filing necessary 6 ITA Nos.357/SRT/2024 Hajivasa Mulla Sadak Masjid evidences and documents. Hence, we are of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to file relevant documents/evidences and to plead his case before the Ld. CIT(E). It is settled law that principles of natural justice requires that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for de novo adjudication and to pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to file necessary documents and evidences as needed by the Ld. CIT(E). For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed. 11. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced on 21/05/2024 in the open court. Sd/- Sd/- (PAWAN SINGH) (BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Surat Ǒदनांक/ Date: 21/05/2024 SAMANTA Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Assessee 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR/AR, ITAT, Surat 6. Guard File By Order // TRUE COPY // Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Surat