Holycross Educational Society, Sonepat V. CIT, Rohtak

ITA 5192/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 519220114 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-12-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 08-10-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RAVINDER SINGH
• Section: 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: C NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI IC SUDHIR, JM AND SHRI J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, A.M. ITA NO: 5192/DEL/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : - HOLYCROSS EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY VS. CIT, ROHTAK RAJIV GANDHI COLONY MURTHAL ROAD SONEPAT, HARYANA (APPELLANT) (RESP ONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH.RAVINDER SINGH, ADV. RESPONDENT BY : NONE O R D E R PER J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER DT. 7.9.2012 OF LD.CIT, ROHTAK PASSED UNDER SECTION 12AA(1)(B)(II) REJECTING THE APPELLATE TRUST APPLICATION IN FORM N O.10A, FOR REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. THERE I S NO PETITION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT. THOUGH THERE ARE 10 CIT/DRS A ND 12 SR.DRS, NOBODY WAS DEPUTED TO C BENCH TODAY. EVEN THE ST AFF FROM THE DRS OFFICE WERE NOT PRESENT. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES W E HEAR SHRI RAVINDER SINGH, LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND DISPOSE OFF THIS APPEAL EX PARTE QUA THE REVENUE. 2 3. WE HAVE HEARD MR.RAVINDER SINGH, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 4. ON A CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE FACTS AND CIR CUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND ON A PERUSAL OF THE PAPERS ON RECORD AS WE LL AS THE PAPER BOOK RUNNING INTO 163 PAGES FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WE HOL D AS FOLLOWS. 5. THE CIT, ROHTAK RECORDED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD N OT SUBMITTED THE ORIGINAL INSTRUMENT CONSTITUTING THE SOCIETY, DESPI TE PROVIDING AN OPPORTUNITY. WE FIND FROM THE CORRESPONDENCE WHICH IS AT PAGE 80 OF THE PAPER BOOK, THAT THE VERIFICATION IN QUESTION WAS C ARRIED ON BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER HEADQUARTERS IN THE OFFICE OF TH E CIT, ROHTAK. THE ASSESSEE ON 22.6.2012 HAS PRODUCED ALL THE NECESSAR Y DETAILS BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER. FURTHER DETAILS WERE FURNISHED TO TH E INCOME TAX OFFICER BY THE ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DT. 7.8.2012. WE ARE I NFORMED THAT MR.NARESH KUMAR SHARMA, THE INCOME TAX OFFICER HQRS, WHO ISSU ED THE NOTICE DT. 12.6.2012 AND WHO RECEIVED ALL THE DOCUMENTS, DETAI LS AND INFORMATION FROM THE ASSESSEE, RETIRED AND CONSEQUENTIALLY THE SE DETAILS AND DOCUMENTS WERE NEVER PLACED BEFORE THE CIT, LEADING TO THE COMMISSIONER RECORDING A WRONG FACT THAT THE ASSESS EE FAILED TO PRODUCE THE ORIGINAL COPY OF THE INSTRUMENT EVIDENCING ESTA BLISHMENT OF THE SOCIETY. 6. THOUGH THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE RAISED NU MEROUS CONTENTIONS, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE MATTER SHOULD BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE CIT WITH THE DIRECTION THAT HE SHOULD CONSIDER 3 THE PAPERS ALREADY FILED ON RECORD AND ALSO THE ARG UMENTS OF THE COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE AND THERE AFTER PASS A SPEAKING ORD ER. THE CIT SHALL PROVIDE PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). 8. IN THE RESULT, THIS APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATIS TICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10 TH DECEMBER,2012. SD/- SD/- (I.C. SUDHIR) (J.SUDHAKAR REDDY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: THE 10 TH DECEMBER, 2012 *MANGA COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT; 2.RESPONDENT; 3.CIT; 4.CIT (A); 5.DR; 6.GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY. REGISTRAR 1. DATE OF DICTATION: 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE THE AUTHOR ON: 3. DRAFT PROPOSED AND PLACED BEFORE SECOND MEMBER ON: 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY THE SECOND MEMBER ON: 5. APPROVED DRAFT CAME TO SR.P.S. ON: 6. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 7. FILE SENT TO BENCH CLERK ON : 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GIVEN TO HEAD CLERK ON: 9. DATE OF DISPATCHING THE ORDER ON: