The Jeevan Sandhya Foundation, Ghaziabad V. CIT (Exemptions), Lucknow

ITA 929/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7953 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-12-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 23-02-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY GOEL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 12A; 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH A, NEW DELHI BEFORE : SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 929/DEL/2016 THE JEEVAN SANDHYA FOUNDATION, C/O N. BHUSHAN & CO., CAS, C-12/114, FIRST FLOOR, DB. PLAZA, RDC, RAJ NAGAR, GHAZIABAD. PAN- AACTT0675Q (APPELLANT) VS. CIT (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SH. SAURABH GUPTA, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY SH. SANJAY GOEL, CIT/DR ORDER PER L.P. SAHU, A.M.: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW DATED 07.01.2016, CHALLENGING THE REJECTION OF APPLICATION FILED BY ASSESSEE U/S. 12AA OF THE I T ACT, AS PER THE GROUNDS TAKEN IN THIS APPEAL. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E MOVED AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S. 12AA ON 24.01.2015 WHICH WAS REJE CTED BY THE LD. CIT(EXEMPTION) FOR NON-APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSEE AGAIN FILED FRESH APPLICATION U/S. 12A A ON 22.07.2015 WHICH WAS STATED TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED IN THE OFFICE OF CIT(E ) ON 30.11.2015. THE LD. DATE OF HEARING 31.12.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 31.12.2018 ITA NO. 929/DEL/2016 2 CIT(E), HOWEVER, REJECTED THIS APPLICATION TOO ON T HE GROUND THAT THERE IS NO CHANGE IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CHALLENGED THE EARLIER REJECTION ORDER BEFORE THE I TAT. AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US . 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIE S AND HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ENTIRE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(EXEMPTION) HAS NOT DECIDED ANY OF THE APPLICATI ONS OF ASSESSEE ON MERITS. A PERUSAL OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER SHOWS THAT THE REAS ONS GIVEN BY THE LD. CIT(EXEMPTION) FOR REJECTION OF ASSESSEES SECOND A PPLICATION DO NOT APPEAR TENABLE. IT IS NOTEWORTHY THAT THE LD. CIT(EXEMPTIO N) HAS NOT PASSED ANY SPEAKING ORDER ON THE APPLICATION OF ASSESSEE. HE H AS NOT EVEN ADDRESSED AS TO WHAT WERE THE OBJECTS AND ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSE E-TRUST BEFORE DENYING REGISTRATION TO THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, FOR WANT O F SPEAKING ORDER, WE THINK IT APPROPRIATE TO SEND THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(E) FOR DECIDING THE ISSUE AFRESH BY WAY OF SPEAKING ORDER IN ACCORD ANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESS EE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO COOPERATE WITH THE LD. CIT(E) AND SHALL PUT UP ITS CASE BEFORE HIM FOR GETTING THE ISSUE DECIDED. ACCORDINGLY, THE APP EAL DESERVES TO BE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATIST ICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31.12.2018. SD/- SD/- (H.S. SIDHU) (L.P. SA HU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 31 ST DECEMBER, 2018 *AKS*