The Vedic Culture Centre, New Delhi V. The Director of Income Tax (E), New Delhi

ITA 4957/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0583 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-01-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 12-11-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMRENDRA KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: S KRISHNAN
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH H NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV AND SHRI K.G. BANSAL I.T.A. NO.4957/DEL/2010 THE VEDIC CULTURE CENTRE, VS. DIRECTOR OF INC OME-TAX (E), 7-INSTITUTIONAL AREA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI. LAXMI NAGAR, NEW DELHI. (PAN: AATT0811G) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI S. KRISHNAN, ADV. RESPONDENT BY: SHRI AMRENDRA KUMAR, S R.DR ORDER PER RAJPAL YADAV: JUDICIAL MEMBER THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AGAINST THE ORD ER OF LEARNED DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI PASSE D UNDER SECTION 80- G(5)(VI) OF THE IT- ON 22 ND SEPTEMBER 2010. 2. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED T HAT IT HAS FILED TWO APPLICATIONS, ONE FOR GRANT OF EXEMPTION UNDER SEC. 80-G(5)(VI) AND THE OTHER UNDER SECTION 80-G(2)(B) OF THE ACT. BOTH THESE APP LICATIONS WERE TAKEN TOGETHER FOR HEARING BY THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTION). IN RESPONSE TO THE QUERY OF THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTI ON), IT HAS SUBMITTED ALL THE DETAILS IN THE PROCEEDINGS RELATABLE TO SECTION 80G(2)(B) OF THE ACT. THE APPLICATION FOR GRANT OF EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 80 G HAS BEEN REJECTED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER ON THE GROUND THAT IT FAIL ED TO SUBMIT THE 2 REQUISITE DETAILS. THE DETAILS ARE COMMON FOR BOTH THE ISSUES AND THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTION) OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED THOSE VERY DETAILS FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 80G(5)(VI) OF THE ACT. HE PR AYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTION) BE SET ASIDE AND THE ISSUE BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTION). LEARNED DR ON THE OTHER HAND SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE FAILED TO RESPOND THE QUESTIONNAIRE OF THE LEARNED DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTION), THEREFO RE, ITS APPLICATION HAS TO BE REJECTED. 3. WE HAVE DULY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AN D GONE THROUGH THE RECORD CAREFULLY. IT EMERGES OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT DETAILS SUBMITTED BY IT FOR PROCESS ING ITS APPLICATION FOR GRANT OF NOTIFICATION UNDER SEC. 80G(2)(B) OF THE ACT WOU LD BE SUFFICIENT FOR PROCESSING THE OTHER APPLICATION. THE ACCOUNT AND O THER DETAILS ARE SIMILAR FOR BOTH THE ISSUES. DUE TO THIS BONA FIDE LAPSE, T HE ASSESSEE FAILED TO SUBMIT THE REQUISITE DETAILS. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE ALL OW THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED DIRECTOR OF INCO ME-TAX (EXEMPTION) AND RESTORE THE ISSUE ON HIS FILE FOR READJUDICATION. T HE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO CO- OPERATE WITH THE LEARNED DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EX EMPTION). IT IS NEEDLESS TO SAY THAT LEARNED DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTI ON) WOULD PROVIDE DUE 3 OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE BEFORE DECID ING ITS APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION. DECISION PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21.01.2011 ( K.G. BANSAL ) ( RAJPAL YADAV ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 21/01/2011 MOHAN LAL COPY FORWARDED TO: 1) APPELLANT 2) RESPONDENT 3) CIT 4) CIT(APPEALS) 5) DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR