SARASWATI SANGHA,BARPALI, BARGARH, ODISHA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER,EXEMPTION WARD, CUTTACK

ITA 486/CTK/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Saraswati Sangha, a trust, appealing against the order of the CIT(Exemption), Hyderabad, which rejected their application for registration under section 80G of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(Exemption) had previously granted registration under section 12A based on similar documentation. The Tribunal found that the CIT(Exemption) had not adequately considered the extensive documentation provided by the assessee and had issued a non-speaking order, which violated the principles of natural justice. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(Exemption) had not properly examined the replies submitted by the assessee to earlier notices and had sought similar information again, indicating a casual approach.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 30028 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAROJ KUMAR DUBEY
• Assessee Lawyers: TANMAY JAIN
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 43; 12A; 80G

Judgement Text

" आयकर आयकर आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण अिधकरण अिधकरण, कटक कटक कटक कटक \u0001यायपीठ \u0001यायपीठ \u0001यायपीठ \u0001यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.486/CTK/2024 (िनधा\u0005रण िनधा\u0005रण िनधा\u0005रण िनधा\u0005रण वष\u0005 वष\u0005 वष\u0005 वष\u0005 / Assessment Year : 2025-2026) Saraswati Sangha, Barpali, Canal Road, C/o Little Angles Public School, Dist: Bargarh, Odisha-768029 Vs CIT(Exemption) Hyderabad PAN No. : AAQAS 8141 K (अपीलाथ\u000f अपीलाथ\u000f अपीलाथ\u000f अपीलाथ\u000f /Appellant) .. (\u0010\u0011यथ\u000f \u0010\u0011यथ\u000f \u0010\u0011यथ\u000f \u0010\u0011यथ\u000f / Respondent) िनधा\u0005\u0013रती िनधा\u0005\u0013रती िनधा\u0005\u0013रती िनधा\u0005\u0013रती क\u0016 क\u0016 क\u0016 क\u0016 ओर ओर ओर ओर से से से से /Assessee by : Shri Tanmay Jain, CA (Appeared through Video Conference) राज\u0018व राज\u0018व राज\u0018व राज\u0018व क\u0016 क\u0016 क\u0016 क\u0016 ओर ओर ओर ओर से से से से /Revenue by : Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT-DR सुनवाई क\u0002 तारीख / Date of Hearing : 27/01/2025 घोषणा क\u0002 तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 27/01/2025 आदेश आदेश आदेश आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : The present appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(E), Hyderabad, passed in Application No.CIT(Exemption), HYD/2024- 25/12AA/11040, vide DIN & Order No.ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2024- 25/1069233331(1), dated 28.09.2024, on the following grounds 1. The learned CIT(Exemption) erred in law by passing a non- speaking order dated 28.09.2024 rejecting the application under section 80G, without specifying particular deficiencies or examining the extensive documentation already submitted, thereby violating principles of natural justice. The appellant is eligible for approval under section 80G. 2. The learned CIT(Exemption) erred in law and acted with patent non- application of mind in rejecting the application under section 80G when the same authority had granted registration under section 12A based on substantially similar documentation, which conclusively proves that essential information regarding charitable activities was already available on record. 3. The learned CIT(Exemption) erred in law by treating the application as \"infructuous\" based on alleged non- compliance with the vague notice dated 19.09.2024 (issued ITA No.486/CTK/2024 2 during peak audit season), despite substantial compliance with earlier notices dated 29.04.2024 effectively and 29.05.2024, denying opportunity of being heard. reasonable 4. The learned CIT(Exemption) erred in law by mechanically rejecting the application on technical grounds, contrary to settled principles that registration/approval under charitable provisions should not be rejected when substantial compliance is demonstrated. 5. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw any of the grounds of appeal before or during the hearing of the appeal. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assesee has filed an application electronically in Form No.10AB seeking registration u/s.80G of the Act, 1961. The ld. CIT(E) asked the assesee to produce the copy of Memorandum of Association/Trust Deed for verification and to furnish a detailed reply on the specific information called for in the notice dated 29.04.2024 & 29.05.2024. However, the ld. CIT(E) found that the assesee could only be able to file part information and neither the assesee could be able to comply fully with the notices issued in respect of proceedings u/s.80G(5)(iv) of the Act. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(E) rejected the application in form 10AB for registration u/s.80G of the Act. Thus, the present appeal is filed by the assesee before us. 3. During the course of hearing, ld. AR submitted that the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(E) is a non-speaking order thereby rejecting the application under section 80G, without specifying particular deficiencies or examining the extensive documentation already submitted, which amounts to violation of principles of natural justice. It was submitted by the ld. AR that the registration u/s.12A of the Act has already been granted in favour of the assesee vide order dated 02.08.2024 by the same ITA No.486/CTK/2024 3 incumbent and the facts and circumstances and the details filed are same. He further submitted that the assesee on two earlier occasions had made complete replies vide acknowledgements dated 14.05.2024 and 03.06.2024 in response to the notices dated 29.04.2024 and 29.05.2024, respectively. The acknowledgements to the said replies are as under :- ITA No.486/CTK/2024 4 ITA No.486/CTK/2024 5 ITA No.486/CTK/2024 6 Reply dated 03/06/2024 vide following acknowledgement :- ITA No.486/CTK/2024 7 4. Thus, the ld. AR submitted that assesee has replied all the questions raised and ld. CIT(E) is not correct in observing that assesee has not filed details as observed in notice dated 19/09/2024 and in the order rejecting the registration u/s.80G of the Act. Accordingly, it is requested that the assesee is eligible for approval u/s.80G of the Act. 5. Ld. CIT-DR objected to the above contention of the ld.AR and submitted that sufficient opportunity was provided by the ld.CIT(E), however, the assessee could not substantiate its claim. Therefore, it was ITA No.486/CTK/2024 8 the prayer of the ld. CIT-DR that the appeals of the assessees should be dismissed. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. A perusal of the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(E) shows that the CIT(E) denied the registration as the assessee could not submit any information or documentary evidences in regard to the claim of the assessees for approval u/s.80G of the Act. However, the ld.AR before us submitted that the assesee-trust is having registration u/s.12A of the Act on 02.08.2024. He also drew our attention to the said registration granted u/s.12A of the Act copy of which is placed in the paper book at pages 46 to 49. Further, from the perusal of two replies filed by the assesee on 14.05/2024 & 03/062024, we find that the assesee has replied to each single query, these replies are available in the paper book pages 7 to 27 and 32 to 43 respectively. Further from the perusal of final notice dated 19/09/2024 issued u/s.14A of the Act which is available in paper book pages 44 to 45, it is seen that the ld. CIT(E) without verifying the details already filed by the assesee again sought same information. Further the notice was issued u/s.14A of the Act though the proceedings are with regard to registration u/s.80G of the Act, which clearly suggests the casual approach of the ld. CIT(E) in dealing the issues pending before him. In view of the above, we are of the opinion that when the revenue authority has already granted registration u/s.12A of the Act in favour of the assesee, it presumes that the revenue authority is satisfied with the charitable activities carried on by the assesee trust. ITA No.486/CTK/2024 9 Accordingly, in the interest of justice, we restore the issue to the file of ld.CIT(E) to grant of approval u/s.80G of the Act to consider the details filed by the assesee in both the replies and may ask any further details, if needed, after providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to submit all the required documents before the ld.CIT(E) for early disposal of the application. 7. In the result, appeal of the assesee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 27/01/2025. Sd/- (GEORGE MATHAN) Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) \u0001याियक \u0001याियक \u0001याियक \u0001याियक सद\bय सद\bय सद\bय सद\bय / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद\u0003य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER कटक कटक कटक कटक Cuttack; \u0003दनांक Dated 27/01/2025 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश आदेश आदेश आदेश क\u0002 क\u0002 क\u0002 क\u0002 \u0003ितिलिप \u0003ितिलिप \u0003ितिलिप \u0003ितिलिप अ\tेिषत अ\tेिषत अ\tेिषत अ\tेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेशानुसा आदेशानुसा आदेशानुसा आदेशानुसार र र र/ BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, कटक/ITAT, Cuttack 1. अपीलाथ\u0007 / The Appellant- Saraswati Sangha, Barpali, Canal Road, C/o Little Angles Public School, Dist: Bargarh, Odisha-768029 2. \b\tयथ\u0007 / The Respondent- CIT(Exemption) Hyderabad 3. आयकर आयु\u0006(अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयु\r / CIT 5. िवभागीय \u0010ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, कटक कटक कटक कटक / DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. गाड\u0010 फाईल / Guard file. स\tयािपत \bित //True Copy// "