IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “H” DELHI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.407 & 408/DEL/2020 Assessment Year 2019-20 Ratani Devi Plot Behind Aapno Ghar Sector-77, Delhi-Jaipur Road, NH-8, Gurgaon Haryana. Vs. CIT(E) Chandigarh. TAN/PAN: AADTR3156M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: None Respondent by: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr.DR Date of hearing: 04 01 2024 Date of pronouncement: 10 01 2024 O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA-A.M. : Bo th the c ap ti one d appeals have be en f iled by the as sessee agains t the orde rs of the C om mi ssioner of Inco me T ax (E xemptio ns), Ch and ig ar h (‘ CIT (E ) ’ in short ) da ted 15. 11. 20 19 and 16. 10.2 019 un der Sec ti on s 8 0G (5) (vi ) a nd 12A A (1) (b) (i i) of the Inco me T a x Act, 1961 ( th e A ct) c onc e rning A Y s 2019- 20. 2. T he captioned appeal in ITA N o.4 07/D el /2020 rel at es to denial o f re gi st rat io n of C ha ritable T rust clai med und er Sect ion 12A A of the A ct by the assessee . L ikewise, appeal in ITA N o. 408/D el / 2020 pe rt ai ns to non g ra nt ing appro val in t e rms of Sect ion 80G (5) (vi ) of th e A ct to the Charitab le Tr us t. I.T.A. No.407 & 408/Del/2020 2 3. Bo th the connected appea ls of t he assessee we re lis ted f or hear ing before t he T ri bunal agains t the res pect ive orders o f the CIT (E ) Chandi ga rh. 4. It i s no ti ced from the case rec ords t ha t mu lt iple opportunit ies w e re gi ve n t o t he ass es see to pursue t he appea l and suppo rt i ts cl ai m befo re t he T ribu nal howe ve r none appe ared. Conse que ntl y, we are c ons t ra int to pr ocee d ex-p ar te. 5. O n pe rus al of t he orde r un der Sec tion 1 2A A of the A ct passed b y the C IT(E ), it is noted tha t the assess ee f ile d a n appl icati on in the pr esc ri be d fo rm see ki ng re gist rati on u nde r Sect ion 1 2A of t he Act. A s per t he applicati on, the Tr us t has been in operati on si nc e 01. 10. 2014. The C IT (E ) no te d in t he ord er t hat the a pplicant mo ved simil ar appli cat ion earl ier a lso see king re gis trati on un der Sect ion 12A w hich was denied for the reasons note d in para graph 2 o f the i mpu gned order. T he assess e e howeve r di d not c ha ll enge t he ac ti on of t he C I T(E ) be fore the T r ib unal but prese nte d a not he r appl ica ti on f or re gistrat ion c la imi ng t hat de fe cts in t he pre vious docume ntati on hav e been remove d. T he C IT (E ) how e ver obse rved that man y of t he de fec ts w hi ch resulted i n denial of exempt ion qua t he appl ication pe rsi sts in the p resent appl icati on as w ell. T he C IT( E) thus b y a r eas one d o rder cont inued w it h t he previ ous act ion of de ni al of exempt io n a nd rejec te d t he re gi strat i on. For the si mi lari t y of reason, the re gis trati on fo r de duc tion unde r Sec t io n 80G w as also deni ed. 6. In the a bsence of any factual pos i tion placed b efore the Trib una l t o re but the asse rt i ons made b y the C IT (E ) w hi le den yi ng the regis t ra tion under Section 12A A and Sect ion 80G of the A ct, w e see no j us ti fiable reason t o i nter fe re w it h i mpugned o rde rs I.T.A. No.407 & 408/Del/2020 3 passed under Sect io n 12AA an d 80 G of t he A ct. C o nsequen tl y, both t he a ppeals a re dis mi ssed ex- par te. 7. In the res ul t, the appeal o f the as sessee i s dismi ssed in lim i ne. Order pronounced in the open Court on 10/01/2024 Sd/- Sd/- [SAKTIJIT DEY] [PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA] VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: /01/2024 Prabhat