Sarav Kalyan Dharmarth Nyas, Panipat V. CIT(Exemption), Chandigarh

ITA 7502/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9786 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-07-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 13-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside
• Section: 80G

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH G : NEW DELHI) (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE ) BEFORE SHRI O.P.KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.7502/DEL./2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : SARAV KALYAN DHARMARTH NYAS VS. CIT(EXEMPTION), 673-L, MODEL TOWN, CHANDIGARH PANIPAT HARYANA (PAN : AACTS1022N) (APPELLIANT) (RESP ONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI H.K.CHOUDHARY, CIT(DR) DATE OF HEARING : 08.07.2021 DATE OF ORDER : 28.07.2021 O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : APPELLANT, SARAV DALYAN DHARMARTH NYAS, PANIPAT (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ASSESSEE) BY FIL ING THE PRESENT APPEAL SOUGHT TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 24.10.2017 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (E)-CHANDI GARH ON THE GROUNDS INTER ALIA THAT : ITA NO.7502/DEL./2017 2 1. THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS LEGALLY BAD AND FACTUALL Y WRONG. 2. ALL THE DOCUMENTS/INFORMATION REQUIRED BY THE IN COME TAX DEPARTMENTS E-PORTAL WERE DULY FURNISHED ALONGWITH THE APPLICATION E-FILED FOR APPROVAL U/S 80(5)(VI) ON D T. 12.04.2017 (INCORRECTLY MENTIONED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER AS 8.4 .2017). THE FOLLOWING IS THE LIST OF THE DOCUMENTS FURNISHED :- I) FORM 10G DT. 8.4.2017. II) APPROVAL DT. 27.9.2002 U/S 80G(5)(VI) FOR A.Y. 2002-03 TO 2004-05. III) REGISTRATION DT. 10.07.2000 U/S 12A(A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. IV) NOTES OF ACTIVITIES OF THE APPELLANT TRUST FOR A.Y. 2014-15, 2015-16 AND 2016-17. V) FINAL ACCOUNTS OF THE APPELLANT TRUST FOR A.Y. 2 014-15, 2015- 16 AND 2016-17. VI) TRUST DEED DT. 27.11.1999. 3. THE ALLEGED LETTERS DT. 12.9.2017 AND 9.10.2017 WERE NEVER DELIVERED TO THE APPELLANT. 3. THE MANDATORY OPPORTUNITY PROVIDED UNDER THE PRO VISO TO RULE 11AA(5) WAS NOT ALLOWED. 4.THE APPELLANT CRAVES FOR PERMISSION TO RAISE ADDI TIONAL GROUND AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF APPEAL. 2. ASSESSEE BEING A TRUST/ SOCIETY REGISTERED UND ER THE SOCIETY REGISTRATION ACT MOVED AN APPLICATION IN F ORM NO.10G ON 08.04.2017 FOR SEEKING APPROVAL U/S 80G OF INCOM E TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE ACT). LD. CIT(E) DENIED THE A PPROVAL TO THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT DESPITE ISSUANCE OF NOT ICES ASSESSEE FAILED TO TURN UP TO PROVIDE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS/ C LARIFICATION. 3. ASSESSEE HAS NOT PREFERRED TO PUT IN APPEARANCE DESPITE ISSUANCE OF THE NOTICE AND CONSEQUENTLY, WE PROCEED ED TO DECIDE THE PRESENT APPEAL WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE LD. D R AS WELL AS ON THE BASIS OF DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE ON THE FILE. ITA NO.7502/DEL./2017 3 4. FEELING AGGRIEVED WITH THE EX PARTE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(E), THE ASSESSEE HAS COME UP BEFORE THE TRIBUNA L BY WAY OF FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIV E FOR THE REVENUE TO THE APPEAL, GONE THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS R ELIED UPON AND ORDERS PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES BELOW IN T HE LIGHT OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 6. BARE PERUSAL OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT( E) GOES TO PROVE THAT DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, LD. CI T(E) SOUGHT NUMEROUS DOCUMENTS / CLARIFICATION FROM THE ASSESSE E WHO FAILED TO TURN UP DESPITE NOTICES ISSUED TO IT AND CONSEQUENT LY QUERIES PUT FORTH BY THE LD. CIT(E) REMAINED UNANSWERED. IT IS A MATTER OF RECORD THAT TWO NOTICES WERE ISSUED TO ASSESSEE FOR 6.10.2017 & 18.10.2017 AND ORDER WAS PASSED BY LD. CIT(E) ON 24 .10.2017 WHICH APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN PASSED IN HASTE IN THE A BSENCE OF ASSESSEE. EVEN OTHERWISE SERVICE OF NOTICES UPO N THE ASSESSEE IS NOT PROVED TO HAVE BEEN EFFECTED ON RECORD. 7. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT IN ORDER TO DECIDE THE ISSUE, ONCE FOR ALL, ADEQUATE O PPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD IS REQUIRED TO BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE . CONSEQUENTLY, IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(E) IS SET ASIDE AN D CASE IS ITA NO.7502/DEL./2017 4 REMITTED BACK FOR AFRESH ADJUDICATION BY PROVIDING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. CONSEQUENTLY, APPEAL F ILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 28 TH DAY OF JULY, 2021. SD/- SD/- (O.P.KANT) (KULDIP SINGH ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED THE 28 TH DAY OF JULY, 2021 BINITA COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.