PANCH SARAVIGYAN HARSUKH VILAS GARDEN , KARULI V. CIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

ITA 87/JPR/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6751 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-09-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 17-01-2020
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B K GUPTA CIT DR DHK
• Section: 12AA

Judgement Text

1 VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,A JAIPUR JH JESK LH-'KEKZ] YS[KK LNL; ,O LAANHI XKSLKBZ] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOS AIN, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 87/JP/2020 UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 M/S. PANCH SARAVIGYAN HARSUKH VILAS GARDEN, NEAR CIRCUIT HOUSE, KARAULI CUKE VS. THE CIT (EXEMPTION) JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AAFAP 9425 L VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P.C. PARWAL, CA JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY: SHRI B.K. GUPTA, CIT- DR LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 11/09/2020 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 14 /09/2020 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M. THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST ORDER OF LD. CIT (E), JAIPUR DATED 09-09.2019 PASSED UN DER SECTION 12AA(1)(B)(II) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHO RT THE ACT) ON THE GROUNDS MENTIONED HEREINBELOW. 1. THE LD. CIT(E) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW I N REJECTING THE APPLICATION OF ASSESSEE FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. ITA NO.87/JP/2020 PANCH SARAVGIYAN VS .CIT (E), JAIPUR 2 1.1. THE LD. CIT(E) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN REFUSING THE REGISTRATION FOR THE REASON THAT NO COMPLIANCE WAS MADE OF THE NOTICES ISSUED BY HIM WHEREAS THESE NOTICES WERE NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. DUE TO PREVAILING COVID-19 PANDEMIC CONDITION, THE HEARING OF THE APPEALS ARE CONCLUDED THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE. 2.1 BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE T RUST HAD APPLIED FOR SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT BEFORE THE LD. CIT(EXEMPTION). IT ALSO EMERGES FROM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(E) TH AT A LETTER / NOTICE NO ITBA/EXM/F/41/2019-20/1016507235 (1) DATED 26-06-20 19 WAS ISSUED AT THE E-MAIL/ ADDRESS PROVIDED IN THE APPLICATION REQUIRING THE APPLICANT TO SUBMIT CERTAIN DOCUMENTS/ EXPLANATIONS BY 11-07- 2019 ALONGWITH ORIGINAL TRUST DEED / MOA FOR VERIFICATION BUT NO C OMPLIANCE WAS MADE BY THE APPLICANT. THEREFORE, THE SAID APPLICATION O F THE ASSESSEE WAS REJECTED BY THE LD. CIT(EXEMPTION) BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- 4. AS DISCUSSED ABOVE, THE APPLICANT DID NOT SUBM IT ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS REGARDING ESTABLISHMENT OF THE TRUST/SOCIETY AS WELL AS EVIDENCES IN SUPPORT OF HI S CLAIM. UNDER RULE 17A OF INCOME TAX RULES, 1962, THE APPLI CANT IS REQUIRED TO PRODUCE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT REGARDING EST ABLISHING OF THE TRUST/ SOCIETY FOR VERIFICATION BUT THE SAME HAS OT BEEN DONE BY THE APPLICANT. 5. TO DECIDE THE MATTER OF SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S 12AA, THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES BEING TAKEN BY TH E APPLICANT ARE ALSO TO BE EXAMINED. THE APPLICANT HAS NOT SUBM ITTED ANY ITA NO.87/JP/2020 PANCH SARAVGIYAN VS .CIT (E), JAIPUR 3 SUCH DETAILS AND OTHER INFORMATION. THEREFORE, IT I S NOT KNOWN THAT THE APPLICANT IS FULLY CARRYING OUT THE ACTIVITIES AS PER ITS OBJECTS. THUS, THE CHARITABLE NATURE AND GE NUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE APPLICANT COULD BE ESTABLI SHED. 6. SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO THE APPLICANT TO PRODUCE DETAILS AND DOCUMENTS IN SUPPO RT OF HIS CLAIM FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE I.T. ACT, 19 61 BUT APPLICANT HAVE FAILED TO DO SO. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE FACTS, THE APPLICATION SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S 12AA IS HE REBY REJECTED AND FILED. 2.2 DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE THE LD. CIT(E) REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE TO SUBMIT CERTAIN DOCU MENTS AND APPLICATIONS FOR WHICH THE COMMUNICATION WAS SENT A T THE E-MAIL ADDRESS PROVIDED IN THE APPLICATION. HOWEVER, THIS MAIL WAS NOT OPENED BY CA NITESH GOENKA AND THEREFORE, IN THE AB SENCE OF THE COMMUNICATION BY CA NITESH GOENKA TO THE ASSESSEE, THE NOTICE REMAINED UNCOMPLIED WITH. ACCORDINGLY, THE LD. CIT( E) PASSED THE ORDER U/S 12AA REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR REGIST RATION. TO THIS EFFECT, THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT TH E NON-COMPLIANCE OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY LD.CIT(E) IS UNINTENTIONAL AND IT IS BECAUSE OF NON-COMMUNICATION OF THE NOTICE BY CA NITESH GOE NKA TO THE ASSESSEE. TO THIS EFFECT, THE AFFIDAVIT OF SH. PRAD EEP KUMAR JAIN, PRESIDENT OF THE TRUST IS FILED BY THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE PR AYED THAT THE CASE ITA NO.87/JP/2020 PANCH SARAVGIYAN VS .CIT (E), JAIPUR 4 OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST MAY BE SENT BACK TO THE LD. C 1T(E) FOR DECIDING THE MATTER AFRESH IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE REASONS. 2.3 DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. DR OBJECT ED TO THE SUBMISSION OF THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO RE LIED ON THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(E). 2.4 WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. COUNSELS FOR BOTH THE PAR TIES AND WE HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE MATERIALS PLACED ON RECORD AS WELL AS THE ORDER OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITY. IN THIS CASE, IT IS OBSERVED THA T THE LD.CIT(E) HAD ISSUED NOTICE THROUGH E-MAIL / ADDRESS PROVIDED IN THE APPLICATION REQUIRING THE APPLICANT TO SUBMIT CERTAIN DOCUMENTS / EXPLANATION BY 11-07-2019 ALONGWITH ORIGINAL TRUST DEED/MOA FOR VE RIFICATION BUT NO COMPLIANCE WAS MADE BY THE APPLICANT FOR THE REASON THAT THIS E-MAIL WAS NOT OPENED BY THE CA NITESH GOENKA AND THEREFORE, T HE COMMUNICATION COULD NOT REACH THE APPLICANT TO COMPLY WITH THE LD . CIT(E) ORDER. THE APPLICANT HAS FILED AN AFFIDAVIT TO THIS EFFECT PRA YING THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF INFORMATION ABOUT THE DATE OF HEARING, THE COMPLIAN CE OF THE LD. CIT(E) COULD NOT BE MADE. THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE FURTHE R PRAYED THAT HE MAY BE GIVEN ONE MORE CHANCE TO CONTEST THE CASE AND PR ODUCE THE REQUIRED DOCUMENTS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(E) AS TO THE REGISTRAT ION OF THE TRUST U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. THE BENCH HAS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERA TION ALL THESE FACTS ITA NO.87/JP/2020 PANCH SARAVGIYAN VS .CIT (E), JAIPUR 5 AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND ALSO FOUND THAT T HE APPLICANT MAY BE GIVEN ONE MORE CHANCE IN THE INTEREST OF EQUITY AND JUSTICE TO CONTEST THE CASE BEFORE THE LD.CIT(E) AND ALSO TO PRODUCE THE R EQUIRED DOCUMENTS CONCERNING THE REGISTRATION OF THE TRUST. IN THIS V IEW OF THE MATTER, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF T HE LD. CIT(E) FOR AFRESH ADJUDICATION AND ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO SUBMI T ALL THE REQUIRED DETAILS BEFORE THE LD.CIT(E) WITHIN 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF THIS ORDER. 3.0 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES IN TERMS INDICATED HEREINABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14 /09/20 20. SD/- SD/- JESK LH-'KEKZ LANHI XKSLKBZ (RAMESH C. SHARMA) (SANDEEP GOSAI N) YS[KKLNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 14 /09/2020. *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT - PANCH SARAVGIYAN, KARAULI 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT-THE CIT (E), JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR . 5. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE {ITA NO. 87/JP/2020} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSTT. REGISTRAR