Yuva Nirman Abhiyan, Rohtak V. CIT (Exemption), Chandigarh

ITA 6066/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7593 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-01-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 27-09-2017
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: AGAINST DATED PASSED
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 80G; 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: F NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDI CIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO.6066/DEL/2017 (THROUGH VIDEO CON FERENCING) YUVA NIRMAN ABHIYAN SWAMI INDERVESH VIDYAPEETH, VPO TITOLI, ROHTAK, ROHTAK, HARYANA AAATY2866N (APPELLANT) VS CIT(EXEMPTION) 5 TH FLOOR, C. R. BUILDING, SECTOR-17E, CHANDIGARH (RESPONDENT) ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST ORDER DATED 31/08/2017 PASSED BY CIT(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE AS UNDER:- 1. THAT THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(EXEMPTIONS) IS AGAINST LAW AND FACTS. 2. THAT THE LD.CIT(EXEMPTIONS) ERRED IN REJECTING T HE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE FOR REGISTRATION U/S 80G ALTHOUGH SOCIETY FULFILLS ALL THE CONDITIONS FOR REGISTRATION AND ALL THE OBJECTS AND ACTIVITIE S OF THE SOCIETY ARE ELIGIBLE FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION U/S 80G OF THE ACT. APPELLANT BY SH. NARESH GUPTA, CA RESPONDENT BY SMT. SUSHMA SINGH, CIT DR DATE OF HEARING 19.01.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 21 .01.2021 3. THE APPELLANT WAS GRANTED REGISTRATION UNDER SEC TION 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 VIDE ORDER DATED 16/09/201 6 BY CIT(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH. THE APPELLANT FILED AN APPLICATION U/S 80G (5) (VI) ON 22/02/2017. THE SAME WAS REJECTED B Y THE CIT(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH VIDE ORDER DATED 31/08/2 017. 4. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE SAID ORDER OF THE CIT(EXE MPTION), CHANDIGARH, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPE AL BEFORE US. 5. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT ON THE SPECIFIC ISSUES UPON WHICH THE CIT(EXEMPTION) REJECTED THE APPLICATION WAS NOT AT ALL QUESTIONED BY THE CIT(EXEMPTION) IN RESPECT OF QUES TIONNAIRE ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT. THEREFORE, THE APPLICATION OF TH E ASSESSEE U/S 80G (5)(VI) BE ALLOWED. 6. THE LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(EXEM PTION), CHANDIGARH. 7. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE RECOR DS, IT CAN BE SEEN THAT THE APPELLANT WAS NEVER CONFRONTED RELATED TO THE ISSUES UPON WHICH THE APPLICATION WAS REJECTED. THEREFORE, IT WILL BE APPROPRIATE TO REMAND BACK THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) (EXEMPTION) AND ALLOW THE ASSESSEE/APPELLANT TO PRESENT HIS CASE AL ONG WITH THE DOCUMENTS. NEEDLESS TO SAY, THE ASSESSEE BE GIVEN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING BY FOLLOWING PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 8. IN RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 21 ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2021 SD/- SD/- (N. K. BILLAIYA) (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEM BER DATED: 21 /01/2021 R. NAHEED * COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI