M/s Delhi Education Hub Social Welfare Trust, V. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow

ITA 87/LKW/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9773 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 05-01-2016
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 28-01-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 12AA

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.87/LKW/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: N. A. C.I.T. (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW. VS M/S DELHI EDUCATION HUB SOCIAL WELFARE TRUST, 113-D, SAKET, MEERUT. PAN:AACTD0308C (RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT) SHRI SAMDARSHI, C. A. APPELLANT BY SHRI A. K. SINGH, CIT, D. R. RESPONDENT BY 05/01/2016 DATE OF HEARING 14 / 01 /2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE OR DER PASSED BY LEARNED CIT (EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW DATED 17/12/2014 PASSED B Y HIM U/S 12AA OF THE I.T. ACT. 2. IN THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLL OWING GROUNDS: 1. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN REJECTIN G THE REGISTRATION U/S 12A(1) OF THE ACT, UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 2. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,(EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN OBSE RVING THE FACT THAT THE APPLICANT TRUST HAS NOT PRODUCED BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, BILLS & VOUCHERS, UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANC ES OF THE CASE. 2 3. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,(EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW WAS AGAIN NOT JUSTIFIED I N OBSERVING THE FACTS THAT THE APPLICANT CRUST IS EVE N NOT MAINTAINING ANY BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 4. THAT THE ORDER OF REJECTION U/S 12A(1) PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS) IS CONTRARY TO THE LAW AS LAID DOWN BY THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF HARDYAL CHARITABLE & EDUCATION TRUST, UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANC ES OF THE CASE. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LEARNED A. R. OF THE ASSESSE E THAT THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT IS ON THIS BASIS THAT THE BOOKS OF ACCO UNTS WERE NOT PRODUCED BEFORE HIM BUT THE FACTS ARE DIFFERENT. HE SUBMITT ED THAT IN PAPER BOOK ON PAGE NO. 6 IS LETTER DATED 17/12/2014 SUBMITTED BEF ORE LEARNED CIT (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW AND IN PARA 11 OF THIS LETTER, IT IS STATED THAT THE ACCOUNT BOOKS MAINTAINED BY THE TRUST ARE PRODUCED FOR PERUSAL OF LEARNED CIT AND RETURN. HE SUBMITTED THAT UNDER THESE FACT S, THE MATTER SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF LEARNED CIT (EXEMPTION ) FOR FRESH DECISION. 4. LEARNED D. R. OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT (EXEMPTION). 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FI ND THAT AS PER LETTER DATED 17/12/2014, AVAILABLE ON PAGE NO. 6 OF THE PA PER BOOK, IT IS STATED THEREIN THAT THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST ARE PRODUCED BEFORE LEARNED CIT (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW FOR HIS PERUSAL AN D RETURN AND THEREFORE, THIS IS NOT CORRECT TO SAY THAT BOOKS WERE NOT PROD UCED BEFORE LEARNED CIT BUT THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE BOOKS WERE NOT LOOKED INTO BY LEARNED CIT. UNDER THESE FACTS, WE FEEL IT PROPER THAT THE MATTE R SHOULD GO BACK TO THE FILE OF LEARNED CIT (EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW FOR FRESH DECISION AFTER EXAMINING 3 THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE AND AFTER PRO VIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WE, OR DER ACCORDINGLY. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/. SD/. (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GAROD IA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMB ER DATED:14/01/2016 *SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1.THE APPELLANT 2.THE RESPONDENT. 3.CONCERNED CIT 4.THE CIT(A) 5.D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW ASSTT. REGISTRAR