Mohanlal Sukhadia University, Udaipur V. CIT (Exemption), Jaipur

ITA 52/JODH/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4363 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 21-02-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K C BADHOK
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Set aside; Audi alteram partem
• Section: 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI N.K.SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI A.T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 52/JODH/2019 (ASSESSMENT YEAR -2019-20) MOHANLAL SUKHADIA UNIVERISTY, UDAIPUR VS THE CIT (EXEMPTIONS), JAIPUR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN: AAAJM1548D REVENUE BY SH. K.C. BADHOK, CIT DR ASSESSEE BY NONE DATE OF HEARING 08.05.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 10.05.2019 O R D E R PER N.K. SAINI, V.P. : THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 24.12.2018 OF THE CIT(EXEMPTIONS), JAIPUR. 2. THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEA L RELATES TO THE REJECTION OF THE APPLICATION MOVED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. 2 3. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPLICATION IN FORM NO. 10A SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF T HE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT') ON-LINE ON 21.6.2018. THE . LD. CIT(E) REJECTED THE SAID APPLICATION BY OBSERVING THAT SINCE OPPORT UNITY HAD BEEN PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE DETAILS AND DOC UMENTS IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAIM FOR REGISTRATION U/S 112AA OF THE ACT BUT THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO DO SO. 4. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL. 5. NOBODY WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, HO WEVER, THE MAIN GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT NO OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD WAS PROVIDED BY THE LD. CIT(E), THEREFORE, THE APPLICAT ION MOVED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS REJECTED IN VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 6. IN HIS RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, THE LD. SR. DR SUPPORT ED THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(E). 7. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF LD. SR. DR AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CASE I T IS NOTICED THAT THE LD. CIT(E) REJECTED THE APPLICATION MOVED BY THE AS SESSEE BY OBSERVING THAT AN OPPORTUNITY WAS PROVIDED VIDE LETTER DATED 6.12.2018 TO THE ASSESSEE BUT ON THE GIVEN DATE NEITHER ANYBODY WAS PRESENT NOR ANY REPLY WAS FILED. FROM THE ABOVE OBSERVATION OF THE LD. CIT(E), IT IS NOT 3 CLEAR AS TO WHETHER THE NOTICE FOR HEARING WAS SERV ED UPON THE ASSESSEE BECAUSE THE LD. CIT(E) SIMPLY STATED THAT OPPORTUNI TY WAS PROVIDED VIDE LETTER DATED 6.12.2018 BUT NOWHERE HE STATED THAT T HE SAID LETTER / NOTICE WAS SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. IT IS WELL SETTLED TH AT NOBODY SHOULD BE CONDEMNED UNHEARD AS PER THE MAXIM AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM . WE, THEREFORE, BY KEEPING IN VIEW THE PRINCIPLES OF NAT URAL JUSTICE, DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO SET ASIDE THIS CASE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(E) TO BE ADJUDICATED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PRO VIDING DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESS EE. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 10.05.2019) SD/- SD/- (A.T. VARKEY) (N.K. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT DATED : 10. 05.2019 . . / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. / CIT 4. ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. , , # / DR, ITAT, JODHPUR 6. & / GUARD FILE 4 / BY ORDER / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR