VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH DQY HKKJR] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS [KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YAD AV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 986/JP/16 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : SPARSH INSTITUTION, AJMER CUKE VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN NO. AAMAS 6526 Q VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 987/JP/16 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : SPARSH INSTITUTION, AJMER CUKE VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN NO. AAMAS 6526 Q VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : NONE JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SMT. ROSHANTA MEENA (J CIT ) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 08.02.2017 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08/02/2017. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. THESE ARE TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDERS OF LD. CIT (EXEMPTIONS) DATED 07.09.2016 WHEREIN THE LD. CIT ( EXEMPTIONS) HAS REJECTED THE ASSESSEES APPLICATION SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE IT ACT AS WELL AS SECTION 80G OF THE IT ACT. 2. NO ONE APPEARED AT THE SCHEDULED DATE OF HEARING FIXED FOR TO-DAY HOWEVER, THE ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION DATED 08.02.2 017 HAS BEEN FILED IN ITA NO. 986 & 987/JP/16 SPARSH INSTITUTION, AJMER VS. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), JAIP UR. 2 RESPECT OF THESE APPEALS SIGNED BY SHRI AJAY SOMAN I . ON PERUSAL OF THE CASE RECORDS, IT IS NOTICED THAT THERE IS NO POWER OF AT TORNEY WHICH HAS BEEN FILED BY SHRI AJAY SOMANI. IN ABSENCE OF THE NECESSARY AUTH ORIZATION ISSUED BY THE ASSESSEE IN FAVOUR OF SHRI AJAY SOMANI, THE ADJOURN MENT APPLICATION FILED BY SHRI AAJAY SOMANI CANNOT BE ACCEPTED AND IS HEREBY REJECTED AND IT WAS DECIDED TO HEAR THE MATTER ON MERITS. 3. ON PERUSAL OF ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(EXEMPT IONS) U/S 12AA(1)(B), IT IS NOTED THAT THE APPLICANT DID NOT SUBMIT THE ORIG INAL DOCUMENTS REGARDING ESTABLISHMENT OF THE SOCIETY/TRUST AS WELL AS EVIDE NCES IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAIM. FURTHER THE LD. CIT(E) HAS STATED THAT THE APPLICAN T HAS NOT PRODUCED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WHICH IS REQUIRED TO VERIFY THE ACTIVIT IES AND THE GENUINENESS THEREOF CARRIED ON BY THE SOCIETY/TRUST. 4. IN LIGHT OF THAT THE APPLICATION WAS REJECTED BY THE LD. CIT(E). FURTHER IN ABSENCE OF THE REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE IT ACT, THE ASSESSEES APPLICATION U/S 80G WAS ALSO REJECTED, 5. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH BOTH THE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(E) AND WE DO NOT SEE ANY INFIRMITY IN THE SAID ORDERS AS THE APPLICA NT FAILED TO SUBMIT NECESSARY DOCUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF ITS APPLICATION INSPITE OF THE SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY PROVIDED BY THE LD. CIT(E) TO THE ASSESSEE. FURTHE R THERE IS NOTHING ON RECORD BEFORE THIS BENCH WHICH HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSES SEE IN SUPPORT OF ITS TWO APPEALS WHICH HAVE BEEN FILED ON 09.11.2016. IN THE RESULT BOTH THE APPEALS ARE REJECTED. ITA NO. 986 & 987/JP/16 SPARSH INSTITUTION, AJMER VS. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), JAIP UR. 3 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 08/02 /2017. SD/- SD/- (KUL BHARAT ) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JAIPUR DATED:- 08/02/2017 PILLAI VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- SPARSH INSTITUTION, AJMER 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE CIT(EXEMPTIONS), JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT AJMER 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ THE CIT(A) AJMER 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO.986 & 987/JP/2016) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR.