AMAR NATH BHAGWANTI CHARITABLE TRUST, PATIALA V. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

ITA 44/CHANDI/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5066 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-08-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 30-07-2024
• Assessment Year: 2023-2024
• Appeal Filed On: 17-01-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Set aside
• Section: 80G

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,चǷीगढ़ Ɋायपीठ “ए” , चǷीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: HYBRID MODE ŵी िवŢम िसंह यादव, लेखा सद˟ एवं ŵी परेश म. जोशी, Ɋाियक सद˟ BEFORE: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM & SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI, JM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA NO. 44/Chd/2024 िनधाŊरण वषŊ / Assessment Year : 2023-24 Amar Nath Bhagwanti Charitable Trust, 146 S, Punjabi Bagh, Patiala, Punjab- 147001 बनाम The CIT(E), Chandigarh ˕ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AABTA7006K अपीलाथŎ/Appellant ŮȑथŎ/Respondent िनधाŊįरती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Vibhor Garg, C.A राजˢ की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 31/07/2024 उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 12/08/2024 आदेश/Order PER PARESH M. JOSHI, J.M. : This is an appeal filed by the assessee under section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 being aggrieved by order No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM 45/2022- 23/1048896396(1) dt. 18/01/2023 which is hereinafter referred to as the “impugned order”. Factual Matrix 2. An application for approval under clause(iii) of first proviso to Section 80G(5) of Income tAx Act, was filed by the assessee on 23/09/2022. 3. In order to examined and verify the objects of the trust or the institution, the genuineness of its activities and fulfilment of all the conditions laid down in clauses (i) to (v) of Section 80G(5) of the Act, a questionnaire was issued electronically on 07/11/2022 requesting the applicant to furnish certain key 2 documents / details online through e proceedings on e filing portal alongwith the supporting documents / evidence, point wise in the sequence by 22/11/2022. 4. That On the stipulated date neither any submission was made nor was any request for adjournment or other communication received from the applicant through any channel. Another letter granting necessary opportunity was issued to the applicant on 13.12.2022 and the matter was fixed for reply by 22.12.2022. On this date, likewise, neither any online/offline reply was submitted nor was any request for adjournment or other communication received from the applicant. In the interests of natural justice, final opportunity was then accorded to the applicant on 29.12.2022 and the matter was fixed for 05.01.2023. However once again, no reply has been furnished in the case nor any communication received from the applicant through any channel even till the date of passing of this order. Given the non-compliances on the aforesaid occasions afforded to the applicant, it becomes evident that the applicant is not interested in pursuing the matter. In the absence of submissions regarding the activities, it is difficult to verify both the nature of objects & genuineness of activities of the applicant. It can safely be concluded that the queries raised could not be answered satisfactorily by the applicant. 5. That due to non responsive attitude of the assessee the impugned order came to be passed which is as under:- “5. In view of the above discussions, the present application of the assessee filed in Form 10AB under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act is disposed of as being deficient in factual evidences in the absence of the requisite submissions and appearances of the assessee at the scheduled hearings. This is despite the granting of at least three opportunities as above. It is pertinent to mention here that it is mandated by the provisions of under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act that where the trust or institution has been provisionally approval u/s 80G it has to make an application for approval u/s 80G within six months of commencement of activities. In the absence of any submission from the applicant it is not possible to ascertain the objects and 3 activities carried out by the applicant. Accordingly the application filed by the applicant for approval u/s 80G of the Act is hereby rejected, which rejection and consequent lack of registration will apply from this F.Y. 2022-23 onwards and also supersede any approval granted u/s 80G of the Act by any authority at any earlier time.” 6. The assessee being aggrieved by the impugned order in Form No. 36 which is form of appeal to this Tribunal has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. That the impugned order is bad both on facts and law. 2. That the Ld. CIT(E) has wrongly and illegally passed an ex-parte order rejecting registration u/s 80G(5) against the facts and circumstances of the case in a mechanical manner. 3. That the Ld. CIT(E) erred in rejecting the registration u/s 80G without allowing an opportunity of being heard against the principle of natural justice. 4. That the Appellant craves permission to add, amend, elucidate any ground of appeal at the time of hearing. Record of Hearing 7. The hearing in the matter took place on 31/07/2024 when both parties were heard. The Ld. AR has placed on record a brief synopsis running into two pages. In the brief synopsis following contentions are under: 1. That the trust was having temporary approval u/s 80G(5)(vi) which had to be regularized on commencement of activities. The trust filed application for regularization of approval u/s 80G(5)(iii) on 23.09.2022. 2. That the application for approval was rejected by the Ld. CIT(E), Chandigarh in an ex-party order dated 18.01.2023. 3. That the appellant did not receive any notice for hearing or the impugned order on registered e-mail [e-mail] nor received any notice physically. 4. The fact that the order u/s 80G(5)(iii) was passed against the society came to notice of the appellant at the time of checking the status of the final approval u/s 80G(5)(iii) in last week of November, 2023 i.e. at the time of filing the revised ITR, the due date of filing was 30.11.2023. It was only then online portal was looked into by the counsel CA Shashi Bhushan for the appellant and he then 4 informed that the registration u/s 80G(5) was rejected vide order dated 18.01.2023. On verifying the registered e-mail it came to the knowledge of the appellant that no e-mail was received. Neither any notice nor the impugned order dated 18.01.2023 was sent on the registered e-mail. 5. That due to the above stated facts the trust was unable to respond to any of the notices issued by Ld. CIT(E). The impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(E) is against the laid down principles of natural justice without affording opportunity of being heard. 6. In view of the facts of the case and above submissions a humble prayer is made to kindly set aside the order and remand it back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) to decide the case on merits after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard after ensuring proper service of notices or pass any other order as Hon'ble Members may deem proper. During the course of hearing apart from repeating & reiterating the contents of brief synopsis the Ld. AR laid much emphasis on the fact that in the “impugned order” there is a violation of the principles of natural justice as no notice for hearing was received by them on their registered e mail [e-mail]. No notice came to be received in physical form / hard copy. It was therefore prayed that impugned order be set aside and matter be remanded back to CIT(E) to decide afresh after affording them a reasonable opportunity of being heard and that a proper notice of hearing be served on them. Per contra the Ld. DR agreed with the contention made by Ld. AR. Findings & Conclusions 8. In the foregoing we hold that impugned order is in violation of the principles of natural justice in as much as the Ld. CIT(E) ought to have given prior notice on email address as provided by the assessee which was [e-mail] before passing the impugned order. Consequently assessee did not receive / served with a notice of hearing and CIT(E) proceeded and passed exparte order which we hold it to be in violation of the 5 principles of natural justice. An opportunity must be given to assessee before any order entailing civil consequences are passed. Order 9. Accordingly impugned order is set aside as and by way of remand on denovo basis with a direction to CIT(E) to decide the application of assessee on merits as expeditiously as possible preferably within 45 days from date of receipt of this order. Assessee to cooperate with Department too. 10. In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 12/08/2024. Sd/- Sd/- िवŢम िसंह यादव परेश म. जोशी ( VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (PARESH M. JOSHI) लेखा सद˟/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ɋाियक सद˟ / JUDICIAL MEMBER AG आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ/ The Appellant 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयुᲦ/ CIT 4. आयकर आयुᲦ (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च᭛डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाडᭅ फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar