Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7558 (ITAT-DELHI)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
3 year(s) 7 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
12-12-2014
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Allowed
Bench Allotted
A
Next Hearing Date
27-11-2014
Assessment Year
misc
Appeal Filed On
05-12-2011
Judgement Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: A NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. T.S.KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .NOS. - 5422 & 5423 /DEL/201 1 (ASSESSMENT YEAR - ) BALAJI EDUCATIONAL TRUST, 203, AGGARWAL PLAZA, SECTOR - 14, ROHINI, NEW DELHI - 110085. PA N - AABTB6954D (APPELLANT) VS DIT(EXEMPTION) , PLOT NO. - 15, 3 RD FLOOR, LAXMI NAGAR, DISTRICT CENTRE, DELHI - 110092. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SH. SIDHARTH, CA RESPONDENT BY SMT. A.MISRA, CIT DR ORDER PER DIVA SINGH, JM BOTH THESE APPEAL S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 2 8 .0 9 .201 1 OF THE DIT(E ) , DELHI ARE BEING DECIDED BY A COMMON ORDER AS THE FACTS, CIRCUMSTANCES AND ARGUMENTS OF THE RESPECTIVE PARTIES REMAINED IDENTICAL. 2. THE ASSESSEE IN ITS APPEALS BEFORE US HAS RAISED VARIOUS GROUNDS ASSAILING THE IMPUGNED ORDERS. THE RELEVANT FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPLICATION ON 15.03.2011 IN FORM NO. - 10A & 10G FOR SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S 12A AND EXEMPTION U/S 80G OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO FILE CERTAIN DOCUMENTS SET OUT IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND CONSIDERING THE REPLY DATED 15.09.2011 , T HE DIT(E) CONSIDERED THE SAME TO BE NOT SUFFI CIENT. AS PER THE IMPUGNED ORDER THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO FOUND TO HAVE PLACED ANOTHER LETTER DATED 19.09.2011 HOWEVER THE DIT(E) HELD BY ITS ORDER DATED 29.09.2011 THAT THE DOCUMENTS FILED WERE NOT SUFFICIENT AND IN THE ABSENCE OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE REGIST RATION U/S 12A WAS NOT GRANTED. IN VIEW OF THE FACTS THAT THE REGISTRATION WAS NOT GRANTED EXEMPTION U/.S 80G CONSEQUENTLY ALSO STOOD REJECTED. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT ALL NECESSARY DETAILS WERE FILED. RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON THE PAPER 2 I.T.A .NO. - 5422 & 5423/ DEL/201 1 BOOK MADE AVAILA BLE BEFORE THE SAID AUTHORITY. IT IS SEEN THAT IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAIM THE ASSESSEE HAS PLACED ON RECORD, COPY O F THE JUDGEMENT OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT DATED 16.08.2012 IN ITA NO. - 1687/2010 IN THE CASE OF DIT VS FOUNDATION OF OP HTHALMIC & OPTOMET RY RESEARCH EDUCATION CENTRE 3. CONSIDERING THE PECULIAR FACTS, CIRCUMSTANCES AND THE ARGUMENTS OF THE PARTIES BEFORE THE BENCH, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT INSTEAD OF GETTING INTO THE DEBATE WHETHER ALL NECESSARY DETAILS WERE FILED OR NOT BEFORE THE DIT(E), I T WOULD BE APPROPRIATE IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES TO RESTORE THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE TO THE DIT(E) WITH THE DIRECTION TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW , T AKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE EVIDENCE PLACED ON RECORD BY THE ASSESSEE . IN CASE THE EVIDENCE RELIED IS FOUND TO BE NOT SUFFICIENT THE ASSESSEE IS GIVEN LIBERTY TO FURTHER SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM TO THE SATISFACTION TO THE DIT(E). CONSIDERING THE EVIDENCE THE ARGUMENTS AND THE LEGAL POSITION ON THE ISSUE THE LD. DIT(E) SHALL PASS A SPEAKING ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. NEEDLESS TO SAY THAT A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD SHALL BE AFFORDED TO THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY THE IMPUGNED ORDER IN BOTH THE APPEALS IS DECIDED AND THE ISSUE IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE TO THE DIT(E). 4. IN THE RESULT THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 2 T H OF D E C E MBER 2014. S D / - S D / - ( T.S.KAPOOR ) (DIVA SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 1 2 / 1 2 /2014 *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITA T NEW DELHI
Mehul