Utkal Gyana Bharati Trust, Bhubaneswar V. CIT, Bhubaneswar

ITA 371/CTK/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 37122114 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-12-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 29-11-2011
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 26-08-2011
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A BHATTACHARJEE
• Assessee Lawyers: D K MOHANTYC R JENA ARS
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 80G

Judgement Text

IN THE INC O ME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE : SHRI K.K.GUPTA, AM , AND SHRI K.S.S.PRASAD RAO, JM ITA NO. 371/CTK/2011 UTKAL GYANA BHARATI TRUST, 250 - A, SAHID NAGAR,BHUBANESWAR PAN: AAATU 2543 G VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TA X, BHUBANESWAR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE APPELLANT: SHRI D.K.MOHANTY/C.R.JENA, ARS FOR THE RESPONDENT SHRI A.BHATTACHARJEE, DR DATE OF HEARING : 29.11.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22.12.2011 ORDER SHRI K.S.S.PRASAD RAO, JM : THIS AP PEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE HAVING BEEN AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX DT. 23.02.2011 REJECTING THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE FILED U/S.12AA OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT,1961 FOR REGISTRATION. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE F OLLOWING ISSUES IN ITS GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT PASSED U/S.12AA OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT,1961 IS NOT BASED ON FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE OR ON POINTS OF LAW. 2. THE LEARNED CIT HAS PASSED THE ORDER INSPITE OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARING BEFORE HIM AND FILING A PETITION REQUESTING ADJOURNMENT. 3. THE LEARNED CIT HAS NOT EXAMINED THE DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION IN FORM 10A OR HE HAS NOT TAKEN ANY STEPS TO VERIFY THE FACTS AVAILABL E WITH HIM BY HAVING REASONABLE ENQUIRY BEFORE PASSING THE ORDER. 4. THE REJECTION OF THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE LEARNED CIT IS NOT TENABLE FOR WANT OF REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY BEING GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE AND FOR NON FOLLOWING THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 3. BOTH THE PARTIES WERE HEARD REGARDING THE ISSUES RAISED IN THE RESPECTIVE APPEALS AND THEIR LEGAL IMPLICATIONS. ITA NO. 371/CTK/2011 2 4. ON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE MATERIAL MADE AVAILABLE TO THE TRIBUNAL AND ANALYZING THE SAME IN THE LIGHT OF THE SUBM ISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES, THE UNDISPUTED FACTS RELATING TO THE ISSUES ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A REGISTERED EDUCATIONAL TRUST RUNNING EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION AND IMPARTS TECHNICAL EDUCATION DEGREE AND DIPLOMA IN ENGINEERING/MEDICAL. THE ASSESSE BEING A CHARITABLE TRUST IS I MPARTING EDUCATION EXCLUSIVELY AN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION APPROACHED THE LEARNED CIT FOR GRANTING REGISTRATION U/S.12A & 80G OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT,1961 BY FILING THE PRESCRIBED APPLICATIONS ENCLOSING THE NECESSARY REQUIRED DOCUMENTS ON 23.9.2010. THE LEARNED CIT HAS FIXED THE HEARING ON 22.2.2011 BUT ON THE DATE OF HEARING THE ASSESSEE FILED ADJOURNMENT PETITION AS THE ADVOCATE WHO LOOKS AFTER THE CASE WAS ABSENT AND THE SAID APPLICATION WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE OFFICE OF THE LEARNED CIT ALSO. BUT THE LEARNED CIT WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE ADJOURNMENT PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, REJECTED THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE FOR REGISTRATION OBSERVING THAT ON THE STIPULATED DATE NEITHER COMPLIANCE WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE NOR ADJOURNMENT P ETITION WAS MOVED. AGGRIEVED WITH THIS ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS VEHEMENTLY CONTENDED THAT THE LEARNED CIT BEING A QUASHI - JU DICIAL AUTHORITY COMING UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT IS EXPECTED TO FOLLOW THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE WHILE DISCHARGING HIS DUT9ES IN DISPOSING OF THE PETITIONS FILED BEFORE HIM. THE LEARNED CIT HAVING RECEIVED THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE DT. 23.9.2010 IN THE PRESCRIBED FORM FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION U/S.12AA HAS FIXED THE DATE OF HEARING ON 22.2.2011 AND DIRECTED THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THE DOCUMENTS AND BOOKS OF ACCOUNT IN SUPPORT OF THE CLAIM FOR REGISTRATION. BUT ON THAT DATE OF HEARING, TH E ASSESSEE, IN THE ABSENCE OF ITS ADVOCATE, HAS ITA NO. 371/CTK/2011 3 MOVED AN APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WHICH WAS DULY ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE OFFICE OF THE LEARNED CIT AND THE ASSESSEE WAS AWAITING FOR THE NEXT HEARING DATE BUT TO ITS SURPRISE IT HAS RECEIVED THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION SOUGHT BY THE ASSESSEE, OBSERVING THAT THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE LEARNED CIT WAS NOT COMPLIED WITH BY THE ASSESSEE. THE OFFICE OF THE LEARNED CIT HAVING ACKNOWLEDGED THE APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNM ENT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT TAKEN THAT INTO CONSIDERATION BUT PROCEEDED TO PASS THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THIS ACT OF THE LEARNED CIT IS NOTHING BUT VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE WHICH HE IS EXPECTED TO FOLLOW BEING AN AUTHORITY UNDER THE I.T. ACT. THEREFORE, THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT IS UNSUSTAINABLE FOR LEGAL SCRUTINY REQUIRING SET ASIDE BY ALLOWING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. CONTRARY TO THIS, THE LEARNED DR HAS VEHEMENTLY ARGUED IN SUPPORT OF THE LEARNED CIT CONTENDING INTER A LIA THAT THE LEARNED CIT IS WELL WITHIN HIS POWERS IN PASSING THE IMPUGNED ORDER WHEN ONCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT COMPLIED WITH THE NOTICE ADMITTEDLY RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT REQUIRING INTERFERENCE. ACCORDINGLY, HE SOUGHT FOR UPHOLDING THE SAME BY DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 7. ON CAREFUL ANALYSIS OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, IT IS SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MOVED AN APPLICATION ON 23.09.2010 FOR REGISTRATION U/S.12AA AND THE LEARNE D CIT HAS FIXED THE DATE OF HEARING ON 22.02.2011 DIRECTING THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THE DOCUMENTS AND BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAIM FOR REGISTRATION. BUT AS CAN BE SEEN FROM THE ACKNOWLEDGED COPY FOR FILING OF ADJOURNMENT PETITION, FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS PRAYED FOR ADJOURNMENT AS ITS ADVOCATE WAS OUT OF STATION DUE TO HIS SONS ILLNESS. THIS WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE CITS OFFICE ON 22.2.2011. IN THE ITA NO. 371/CTK/2011 4 IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED, THE LEARNED CIT HAS NOT ALL TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION O F THIS PETITION BUT BENT UPON PASSING THE IMPUGNED ORDER OBSERVING THEREIN THAT THERE IS NO COMPLIANCE TO THE NOTICE OF HEARING ISSUED BY HIM AND THE LEARNED CIT HAS PASSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER. FROM THE TENOR OF THE ASSESSEE, IT IS CLEAR THAT THERE IS NO OB SERVANCE OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE BY THE LEARNED CIT. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THIS IS A FIT CASE TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO HIS FILE FOR DE NOVO CONSIDERATION OF THE APPLICATION FILED B Y THE ASSESSEE SEEKING REGISTRATION IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. HENCE, THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT IS SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO HIS FILE WITH A DIRECTION FOR DE NOVO CONSIDERATION OF THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S.12AA BY STRICTLY FOLLOWING THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND PASS NECESSARY CONSEQUENTIAL ORDER AS PER LAW. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. S D/ - S D/ - (K.K.GUPTA) ACC OUNTANT MEMBER ( K.S.S.PRASAD RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE: 22.12.2011 H.K.PADHEE, SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT: UTKAL GYANA BHARATI TRUST, 250 - A, SAHID NAGAR,BHUBANESWAR 2. THE RESPONDENT: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, BHUBANESWAR. 3. THE CIT, 4. THE CIT(A), 5. THE DR, CUTTACK 6. GUARD FILE (IN DUPLICATE) TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, SENIOR PRIVATE SECRET ARY.