RAKESH LAW FOUNDATION,CHENNAI V. CIT(EXEMPTION) CHENNAI, CHENNAI

ITA 2938/CHNY/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Rakesh Law Foundation appealing against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chennai, which rejected their application for registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The rejection was initially due to the assessee's failure to respond to a show-cause notice. The Tribunal found that the assessee did not receive the notice, leading to the decision to remand the case for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 107567 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R. CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: B. RAMAKRISHNAN; F
• Keywords: Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी एस.एस. िवʷनेũ रिव, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी अिमताभ शुƑा, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2938/Chny/2024 Rakesh Law Foundation, No. 51/11, 7th Avenue, Soundariya Colony, Anna Nagar West Extn., Chennai 600 101. [PAN:AAETR6528A] Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax [Exemptions], Chennai. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, F.C.A. ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 22.01.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 23.01.2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 15.06.2023 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai in rejecting the application filed in Form 10AB under section 12(1)(ac)(iii) seeking registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. 2. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 446 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. I.T.A. No.2938/Chny/24 2 Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee raised 3 grounds of appeal amongst which, the only issue emanates for our consideration as to whether the ld. CIT(E) is justified in rejecting the application filed in Form 10AB under section 12(1)(ac)(iii) seeking registration under section 12AB of the Act. 4. We note that the assessee filed online application on 21.12.2022 in Form No. 10AB under section 12(1)(ac)(iii) seeking registration under section 12AB of the. The ld. CIT(E), while processing the application, asked the assessee to show-cause as to why its application should not be rejected on account of reasons mentioned in para 2 & 3 of the impugned order. For having no such details, the ld. CIT(E) rejected the application of the assessee. 5. The ld. AR Shri B. Ramakrishnan, F.C.A. submits that no notice was served on the registered email ID ‘[e-mail]’ and thus, non-attendance of the hearings on the part of the assessee was not wilful and was caused by factors beyond its control. He further I.T.A. No.2938/Chny/24 3 submits that the assessee is ready to file all relevant details in response to the show-cause notice issued by the ld. CIT(E) and prayed that one more opportunity may be afforded to the assessee to pursue its case before the ld. CIT(E). 6. The ld. DR Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT opposed the same. 7. On perusal of para 3 and 4 of the impugned order, we note that the ld. CIT(E) proceeded to reject the application Form No. 10AB under section 12(1)(ac)(iii) seeking registration under section 12AB of the Act for non-compliance of furnishing details in response to the show-cause notice, thereby, clearly establishes that the assessee has no opportunity before the ld. CIT(E). The contention of the ld. AR is that no notice of hearing was served on the assessee on the registered email ID [e-mail] or to the email ID as provided while filing an application in Form 10AB. Taking into consideration the submissions of the ld. AR and the ld. DR and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to remand the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for fresh consideration. Thus, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. I.T.A. No.2938/Chny/24 4 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 23rd January, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (AMITABH SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 23.01.2025 Vm/- आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF. "