SAMARTHA GRAMEENABHIVRUDHI SAMSTHE(R),VIJAYAPUR V. CIT, EXEMPTIONS , BANGALORE

ITA 103/BANG/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Samartha Grameenabhivrudhi Samsthe against the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), which had rejected their application for registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The rejection was based on the grounds of non-compliance with notices from the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, which the assessee claimed not to have received. The Tribunal found that the assessee was not given an effective opportunity of hearing, thus violating the principles of natural justice, and decided to restore the matter for re-examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 396814 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASEEM SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: SRIKRISHNA KANTILA; C.A
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.103/Bang/2025 Assessment Year: 2025-26 Samartha Grameenabhivrudhi Samsthe, Sidharth Nagar Takke Road, Vijayapur – 586 102. PAN – AAWAS 3296 H Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Bangalore. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Srikrishna Kantila, C.A Revenue by : Shri Aseem Sharma, CIT (DR) Date of hearing : 09.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 28.05.2025 O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the ld. CIT(E), Gul dated 01/11/2024 in DIN No. ITBA/COM/F/17/ 2024-25/1070069186(1) rejecting the application for registration under section 12AB of the Act. 2. The only issue raised by the assessee is that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) [CIT(E)], erred in rejecting the application for registration filed under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. ITA No.103/Bang/2025 Page 2 of 3 . 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed an application seeking registration under section 12AB of the Act. The said application was rejected by the learned CIT(E) on the ground that the assessee had failed to comply with the notices issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO). It was observed in the impugned order that no response was filed by the assessee, and hence, the registration was denied. 4. During the course of appellate proceedings before us, the learned Authorised Representative (AR) submitted that the assessee had not received any notice from the JAO or ld. CIT(E) concerning the registration proceedings. The ld. AR contended that the assessee was denied the opportunity of being heard and that the principles of natural justice had been violated. It was submitted that the non-compliance was not intentional or deliberate but solely due to lack of proper communication. The ld. AR, therefore, prayed that one more opportunity be granted to present the assessee’s case before the ld. CIT(E). 5. On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative (DR) supported the order passed by the ld. CIT(E). The ld. DR submitted that the notices were duly issued, and the assessee had sufficient time to respond. However, the ld. DR did not object if the matter is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for fresh consideration in the interest of justice. 6. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. It is seen that the application of the assessee under section 12AB was rejected without affording an effective opportunity of hearing, as the assessee has contended that no ITA No.103/Bang/2025 Page 3 of 3 . notice was received. In the interest of substantial justice and fair play, we are of the considered opinion that the matter should be restored to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication, after providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(E) and restore the matter to his file with a direction to re-examine the assessee's application for registration under section 12AB of the Act de novo after giving the assessee due opportunity to present its case. Hence, the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in court on 28th day of May, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (SOUNDARARAJAN K) (WASEEM AHMED) Judicial Member Accountant Member Bangalore Dated, 28th May, 2025 / vms / Copy to: 1. The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 6. Guard file By order Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore "