IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. N.K.CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. A.L.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 610/ASR/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2018-19 NAVYUG SIKHIA VIKAS SOCIETY NEAR JALANDHAR BYEPASS, COLLEGE ROAD, DHARAMKOT, DISTT. MOGA. VS. THE CIT(EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH. [PAN:AAATN 4579M] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. SUDHIR SEH GAL (LD. AR) RESPONDENT BY: SMT. PRABHJOT KAUR (LD. CIT-DR) DATE OF HEARING: 28.11.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 30.12.2019 ORDER PER N.K.CHOUDHRY, JM: THE APPELLANT SOCIETY HAS PREFERRED THE INSTANT APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28.09.2018 IMPUGNED HEREIN PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH, U/S 12AA(1)(B)(II) OF T HE I.T. ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER CALLED AS THE ACT). 2. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT ON 28.03.2018 WITH TH E FACT THAT THE APPELLANT SOCIETY HAS BEEN CREATED ON 27.05.2003 AND IS IN OPERATION SINCE THEN. THE SAID APPLICATION WAS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERAT ION BY THE LD. CIT(E) WHILE ACCORDING OPPORTUNITY OF PERSONAL HEA RING ON 26.07.2018 AND THE APPELLANT WAS ASKED TO FILE THE DETAILS/CLARIFICATIONS ON 16.08.2018 AS MENTIONED IN P ARA NO.5 OF THE ITA NO.610/ASR/ 2018 (A.Y.2018-19) NAVYUG SIKHIA VIKAS SOCIETY VS. CIT(E) 2 ORDER, WHICH WERE DULY REPLIED BY THE APPELLANT SOCIET Y, THEREAFTER CONSIDERING THE REPLY AND DOCUMENTS OF THE APPELLANT THE LD. CIT(E) RAISED ADDITIONAL QUERIES VIDE E-MAIL DATED 21.09.201 8. AS PER ORDER , NEITHER ANY REPLY HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE LD. CIT (E) NOR ANY ATTEMPT HAS BEEN MADE BY THE APPELLANT TO PUT FORTH ITS VIEWS IN THE MATTER EVEN TILL THE DATE OF PASSING THE ORDER. IT WA S FURTHER OBSERVED BY THE LD. CIT(E) THAT IN ABSENCE OF ANY SPECIFIC RESPONSE TO THE QUERIES RAISED VIDE E-MAIL DATED 21.09.2018 AND THE P RESUMPTIONS INHERENT THEREIN, THE GENUINENESS OF ACTIVITIES OF THE SOCIETY CANNOT BE ASCERTAINED. ULTIMATELY, THE LD. CIT(E) REJECTED TH E APPLICATION FILED BY THE APPELLANT. DURING THE COURSE OF ARGUMENT OF THIS CASE, OUR ATTENTI ON WAS DRAWN BY THE LD. AR TO PAGES NO. 48 T0 50 OF THE PB, WHICH IS REPLY OF THE APPELLANT SENT THROUGH E-MAIL ON DATED 28.09.201 8 TO THE LD. CIT(E) , HOWEVER THE SAME WAS NOT CONSIDERED BY THE L D. CIT(E). IT APPEARS THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED ON THE VERY SAME DATE I.E. 28.09.2018 WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE REPLY OF THE APPELLANT. IN REASONABLE PROBABILITY, INADVERTENCE COULD BE A REASON FOR NOT CONSIDERATION OF REPLY/E-MAIL SENT BY THE APPELLANT OR MAY BE THE REPLY WOULD HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE CIT(E) LATER ON OR ON NON- OFFICE HOURS. HENCE, CONSIDERING THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIR CUMSTANCES WE ARE INCLINED TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD . CIT(E) AND TO REMAND THE CASE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(E) FOR DECI SION AFRESH, SUFFICE TO SAY WHILE AFFORDING PROPER AND REASONABLE OP PORTUNITIES OF BEING HEARD TO THE APPELLANT AND WITHIN THREE MONTH S OF THIS ORDER. THE LD. CIT(E) IS DIRECTED TO CONSIDER THE REPLY DATED 28.09.2018 SENT THOROUGH E-MAIL BY THE APPELLANT, WHILE PASSING THE O RDER. ITA NO.610/ASR/ 2018 (A.Y.2018-19) NAVYUG SIKHIA VIKAS SOCIETY VS. CIT(E) 3 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE APPELLANT SOCI ETY STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30/1 2/2019. SD/- SD/- (DR. A.L.SAINI) (N.K.CHOUDHRY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDIC IAL MEMBER DATED: 30/12/2019. /PK/ PS. COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THEN CIT(APPEALS) 5. SR DR, I.T.A.T. AMRITSAR 6. GUARD FILE TRUE COPY BY ORDER