ORIYA SAMAJ NAGPUR,NAGPUR V. CIT EXEMPTION , PUNE, NAGPUR

ITA 290/NAG/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Oriya Samaj Nagpur appealing against the decisions of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune, which had cancelled the provisional registration and approval under sections 12AB and 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal found that the assessee was not given adequate opportunity to be heard, which led to the decision to remit the matter back to the CIT(E) for a fresh decision, emphasizing the need for a fair hearing and proper consideration of the submitted documents.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 37896 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2023-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANDIPKUMAR SALUNKE
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJAY THAKAR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI KHETTRA MOHAN ROY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.Nos.289 & 290/NAG./2024 [U/sec.12AA and 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961] Oriya Samaj Nagpur, 164/3, Kukde Layout, Rameshwari Road, Babulkheda, NAGPUR – 440 027. Maharashtra. PAN AAATO7942B vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Room No.322, 3rd Floor, Income Tax Office, PMT Bldg., Shankar Seth Road, PUNE – 411 037. Maharashtra. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Sanjay Thakar, Advocate For Revenue : Shri Sandipkumar Salunke, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 27.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 28.01.2025 ORDER PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M. : The assessee has filed the above two appeals against the respective separate orders of the learned CIT(E), Pune in cancelling the provisional registration and approval u/sec.12AB r.w.s.12A(1)(ac)(vi) and u/sec.80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short “the Act”], vide orders both dated 11.03.2024 respectively. 2. During the course of hearing, Learned Counsel for the Assessee, submitted that the assessee has not been provided with 2 ITA.Nos.289 & 290/NAG./2024 adequate opportunity of hearing to put forth his case and the documents placed on record were also not properly appreciated by the learned CIT(E) and rejected the application and approval of the assessee society due to non-appearance. He submitted that the assessee society could not appear before the learned CIT(E) due to the circumstances beyond it’s control. He submitted that the assessee-society has got fair chances to get approval and registration, if one more opportunity has been provided to the assessee-society to substantiate it’s case. He submitted that assessee-society is ready to submit all the relevant details as called for by the learned CIT(E) and prayed that the matter in issues may be remitted back to the file of learned CIT(E) in the larger interest of justice. 3. The Learned DR on the other hand strongly opposed the request of the assessee to remit the issues back to the file of learned CIT(E). He submitted that despite service of notice the assessee is not responded and therefore, the learned CIT(E) has rightly rejected the application for registration and approval under the Act. 4. We have heard the rival submissions of both the parties and perused the material on record. We find that it is an admitted 3 ITA.Nos.289 & 290/NAG./2024 fact that the assessee-society has been granted provisional registration and approval by the department. Since the assessee society could not respond to the notice(s) issued by the learned CIT(E), he rejected the application for registration and approval u/secs.12AA and sec.80G(5) of the Act, respectively, without deciding issue(s) on merits. We, therefore, in the larger interest of justice, remit the issue of registration u/sec.12AA and approval u/sec.80G(5) of the Act back to the file of learned CIT(E), for his afresh adjudication as per fact and law, by providing due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee society is directed to furnish all the documents before the learned CIT(E) to adjudicate the matter in issue without taking adjournment under any pretext. We hold and direct accordingly. 5. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 28.01.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (KHETTRA MOHAN ROY) (V. DURGA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Nagpur, Dated 28th January, 2025 VBP/- 4 ITA.Nos.289 & 290/NAG./2024 Copy to 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The CIT(A), Nagpur concerned 4. The CIT, Nagpur concerned 5. The D.R. ITAT, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur 6. Guard File. //By Order// True Copy Sr. Private Secretary : ITAT : Nagpur Bench NAGPUR. "