KAMDHENU GRAM SEWA SAMITI,HARYANA V. .COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

ITA 3933/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Kamdhenu Gram Sewa Samiti, which appealed against the rejection of their applications under sections 12AB and 80G(5)(vi) of the Income Tax Act by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chandigarh. The tribunal noted a delay in filing the appeals but condoned it, considering the reasonable cause attributed. The main contention from the assessee was the inability to produce relevant information and documents before the CIT(E) due to not receiving a notice. Both parties agreed that the matter should be remitted back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision, allowing the assessee to present the necessary information.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 38179 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-12-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DAYAINDER SINGH SIDHU
• Assessee Lawyers: BALDEV RAJ; MANISH UPNEJA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS. 3932 & 3933/Del/2024 A.YR. : N/A KAMDHENU GRAM SEWA SAMITI, SEWASADHNA KENDRA JHINJHOLI, KHARKHAUDA SONIPAT-131402 HARYANA (PAN: AAETK7346M) VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), ROOM NO. 1, 5TH FLOOR, C.R. BUILDING, HIMALAYA MARG, SECTOR 17-E, CHANDIGARH (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by : Shri Baldev Raj, CA & Shri Manish Upneja, CA Respondent by : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 10.12.2024 Date of pronouncement : 16.12.2024 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, AM : These appeals have been filed by the Assessee against the rejection of application u/s. 12AB as well as rejection of application u/s. 80G(5)(vi) of the Act by the Ld. CIT(E), Chandigarh vide its order dated 24.01.2024 and 02.02.2024 respectively. 2 | P a g e 2. The grounds raised in ITA No. 3932/Del/2024 reads as under:- i) That on the facts and in law, the order dated 24.01.2024 passed by the ld. CIT(E), Chandigarh u/s. 12AB(1)(b)(ii)(B) of the Act is bad in law and void ab initio. ii) That on the facts and in circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(E) erred in not granting the registration u/s. 12AB(1)(b)(ii)(B) of the Act. 3. The grounds raised in ITA No. 3933/Del/2024 reads as under:- i) That on the facts and in law, the order dated 2.02.2024 passed by the ld. CIT(E), Chandigarh by rejecting application for approval under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act is bad at law and void ab initio. ii) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(E) erred in not granting the approval u/s. 80G(5)(iii) of the Act. 4. At the outset, it is noticed that there is a delay of 155 days and 146 days respectively in both the appeals in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The reasonable cause for the same has been attributed. Hence, in the interest of justice, the delay in dispute is hereby condoned in both the appeals. 5. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assesse submitted that assesse could not produce the relevant information and documents before the Ld. CIT(E), as notice in this regard was not received. He prayed that an opportunity may be granted to the assesse to present the case before the Ld. CIT(A). Per contra, Ld. CIT-DR did not have any objection to this proposition. 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. After considering the aforesaid factual matrix, we are of the considered view, that interest of justice will be served, if the issues in dispute are remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with the directions to adjudicate the issues in dispute afresh by passing a speaking order and provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the 3 | P a g e assessee. We hold and direct accordingly. Before us, Assessee’s AR undertook to provide the necessary information in this regard to the Ld. CIT(E) during the proceedings. 7. In the result, both the Assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 16/12/2024. Sd/- (YOGESH KUMAR US) Sd/- (SHAMIM YAHYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SRBHATNAGAR Copy forwarded to:- 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT Assistant Registrar "