M/s Udasin Brahm Akhada Sahib Lok Bhalai Trust, Kurukshetra V. CIT (E), Chandigarh

ITA 600/CHANDI/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1581 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-09-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 17-09-2015
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 03-06-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAVI SARANGA L
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside
• Section: 12AA; 22

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH,CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS.RANO JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 600/CHD/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2015-16 M/S UDASIN BRAHM AKHADA VS THE CIT (E), SAHIB LOK BHALAI TRUST, CHANDIGARH. VILLAGE MAANDI, TEHSIL PEHOWA, KURUKSHETRA. PAN: AAATU5171G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI AJAY JAIN RESPONDENT BY : SHRI RAVI SARANGAL DATE OF HEARING : 17.09.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22.09.2015 O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI,JM THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORD ER OF LD. CIT(EXEMPTIONS) CHANDIGARH DATED 20.04.2015 REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION UNDER SE CTION 12AA OF THE ACT. 2. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESSEE FILED APPLICATION FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA IN THE OFFICE OF THE CIT, KARNAL WHICH WAS TRANSFERRED TO CIT (EXEMPTIONS) CHANDIGARH. IT IS NOTED THAT NO FURTH ER DETAILS HAVE BEEN FILED BY ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF T HEIR CLAIM. THE CIT (EXEMPTIONS) ISSUED NOTICE FOR 25.0 3.2015 AND 13.04.2015, HOWEVER, NONE APPEARED BEFORE HIM ON 2 BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE REPORT FROM ITO (EXEMP TIONS) AMBALA WAS CALLED FOR WHO HAS SUBMITTED HIS REPORT DATED 08.04.2015 STATING THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT CARRIED OU T ANY ACTIVITIES AS PER THEIR AIMS AND OBJECTS AND THEREF ORE, DID NOT RECOMMEND FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTI ON 12AA OF THE ACT. THE CIT NOTED THAT SINCE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED THE TRUST DEED, MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION, NO BOOKS OF ACCOUNT/VOUCHERS PRODUCED, THEREFORE, GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES COULD NOT BE EXAMINED AND ACCORDINGLY, REJECTED THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT APPLICATION FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION WAS FILED BEF ORE CIT KARNAL WHICH WAS SUPPORTED BY CERTIFIED COPY OF THE TRUST DEED AND AUDITED ACCOUNTS. THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED N OTICE FROM ACIT, KURUKSHETRA DATED 31.10.2014 REQUIRING T O FURNISH SEVERAL INFORMATION FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATI ON UNDER SECTION 12AA, WHICH ASSESSEE HAS SUPPLIED THROUGH R EPLY DATED 14.11.2014. THEREAFTER, ASSESSEE ALSO RECEIV ED LETTER FROM ITO (EXEMPTIONS) AMBALA AND ASSESSEE SUBMITTED DETAILS THROUGH REPLY DATED 01.04.2015. HE HAS ALSO FILED AFFIDAVIT TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE TRUST STATING THEREIN THAT COMPLETE DETAILS WERE SUBMITTED BEFORE ITO (EXEMPTIONS) AND BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WERE ALSO PRODUCE D BUT NO NOTICE HAVE BEEN RECEIVED FROM CIT (EXEMPTIONS) CHANDIGARH. HE HAS, THEREFORE, SUBMITTED THAT ASSE SSEE HAS NOT BEEN GIVEEN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD BY T HE CIT (EXEMPTIONS) THEREFORE, MATTER MAY BE REMANDED 3 TO HIM FOR GIVING FRESH OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. THE LD. CIT DR, HOWEVER RELIED UPON IMPUGNED ORD ER AND SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE COULD FILE FRESH APPLIC ATION FOR REGISTRATION BEFORE CIT (EXEMPTIONS). 5. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE AR E OF THE VIEW THE MATTER REQUIRES RE-CONSIDERATION AT TH E LEVEL OF CIT (EXEMPTIONS). THE ASSESSEE FILED APPLICATIO N FOR REGISTRATION BEFORE CIT, KARNAL. THE ASSESSEE REC EIVED NOTICE FROM ACIT, CIRCLE, KURUKSHETRA TO FURNISH SE VERAL DOCUMENTS FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 1 2AA OF THE ACT WHICH WAS RESPONDED BY THE ASSESSEE BY FILI NG A REPLY AS NOTED ABOVE. THEREAFTER, ASSESSEE ALSO RE CEIVED NOTICE FROM ITO (EXEMPTIONS) AMBALA REQUIRING SEVER AL DETAILS WHICH WERE ALSO RESPONDED BY THE ASSESSEE B Y FILING OF REPLY DATED 01.04.2015. THE AFFIDAVIT OF PRESIDENT OF ASSESSEE TRUST HAS BEEN FILED DENYING RECEIPT OF ANY NOTICE FROM THE OFFICE OF CIT(EXEMPTIONS). THESE FACTS WOULD SHOW THAT ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THE REQUIR ED DOCUMENTS BEFORE ACIT, KURUKSHETRA AND ITO (EXEMPTIONS) AMBALA. THE ASSESSEE ALSO PRODUCED COMPLETE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND VOUCHERS BEFORE THEM ALSO AS PER AFFIDAVIT OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE ASSESSEE T RUST. HOWEVER, NONE OF THESE REPLIES OF THE ASSESSEE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. FURTHER, THE ITO (EXEMPTIONS) AMBALA FILED A REPORT DATED 08.04.2015 BEFORE CIT (EXEMPTIONS) IN WHICH HE DID NOT RECOMME ND 4 GRANT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT . IT APPEARS THAT THIS REPORT OF THE ITO (EXEMPTIONS) AM BALA WAS NOT CONFRONTED TO THE ASSESSEE FOR FILING THE R EPLY AND EVEN NOTHING IS MENTIONED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. T HE ASSESSEE ALSO DENIED RECEIPT OF ANY NOTICE FROM THE OFFICE OF CIT (EXEMPTIONS). THEREFORE, THESE FACTS CLEARL Y SHOW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN GRANTED REQUISITE SU FFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD BEFORE PASSING THE IMPUG NED ORDER AND THAT THE MATERIAL ON RECORD HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED AND DISCUSSED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THEREFORE, ORDER OF THE CIT (EXEMPTIONS) COULD NOT BE SUSTAINED IN LAW. 6. WE, ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND RESTORE THE MATTER IN ISSUE TO THE FILE OF CIT (EXE MPTIONS) CHANDIGARH WITH DIRECTION TO RE-DECIDE APPLICATION OF REGISTRATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW STRICTLY ON MER ITS BY CONSIDERING THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND BY GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESS EE. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (RANO JAIN) (BHAVNES H SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 22 ND SEPT., 2015. POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT, DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT/CHD