SURESH RAJ JASKANWAR JAIN SURANA FOUNDATION,VIVEKANAND PURI V. CIT(EXEMPTION), DELHI, CIVIC CENTRE

ITA 4781/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Suresh Raj Jaskanwar Jain Surana Foundation against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), which rejected their application for approval under section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Appellant contended that the rejection was made without providing an adequate opportunity to be heard, thus violating the principles of natural justice. The Respondent argued that sufficient opportunities were provided, and the Appellant failed to substantiate their claim with adequate documentation. The Tribunal found merit in the Appellant's argument regarding the lack of adequate hearing and restored the matter to the CIT(Exemption) for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 101834 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2024-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAYA CHOUDHARY
• Assessee Lawyers: NEETU JAIN; MOHIT CHAUDHARY
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

" 1 ITA No. 4781/Del/2024 Suresh Raj Jaskanwar Jain Surana Foundation IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 4781/Del/2024 (A.Y. 2024-25) Suresh Raj Jaskanwar Jain Surana Foundation Housse No. 241, VivekanandPuri, Sarai Rohilla City, GulabiBagh, North Delhi PAN: AAXTS0791F Vs. CIT(Exemption) Civic Centre, 26th Floor, E-2, Block, Civic Centre, Minto Road, Delhi Appellant Respondent Assessee by CA Neetu Jain, CA Mohit Chaudhary, CA Harish Chaudhary and Advocate Mitika Chaudhary Revenue by Ms. Jaya Choudhary, CIT DR Date of Hearing 16/04/2025 Date of Pronouncement 17/04/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)-Delhi (‘Ld. CIT(E)’ for short) dated 24/09/2024. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, the Appellant filed application in form No. 10AB for approval u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax, 1961 2 ITA No. 4781/Del/2024 Suresh Raj Jaskanwar Jain Surana Foundation (‘Act’ for short) before the Ld. CIT(Exemption), Delhi. The application filed by the Appellant came to be rejected by the CIT(Exemption) vide order dated 24/09/2024, which has been called in question in the present Appeal on the grounds mentioned above. 3. The Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submitted that, the Ld. CIT(E) has passed the order impugned without affording adequate opportunity to be heard and the same is in violation of principals of natural justice. Thus, sought for allowing the appeal. 4. Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that even after providing ample opportunities, the applicant has submitted all the documents as required by the Ld. CIT(E), thus, the Ld. CIT(E) rightly rejected application filed by the Appellant. Therefore, sought for dismissal of the Appeal. 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is seen from the order of the Ld. CIT(E) the application has been rejected on the ground that the claim of the Appellant cannot be verified as it has failed to provide sufficient documentary evidence and explanation to substantiate the claim of the Appellant. It is the case of the Assessee has provided all the documents and also clarification sought by the Ld. CIT(E), however, the Ld. CIT(E) failed to 3 ITA No. 4781/Del/2024 Suresh Raj Jaskanwar Jain Surana Foundation examined the same. In view of the above facts and circumstances, we restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to decide the application afresh after considering all the documents produced by the Appellant and after considering the submissions of the Appellant and pass the order in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Appellant. The Appellant is also at liberty to produce all the document as required by the Ld. CIT(E) to substantiate it’s the claim. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the Appellant is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 17th April , 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 17 .04.2025 R.N, Sr.P.S* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI 4 ITA No. 4781/Del/2024 Suresh Raj Jaskanwar Jain Surana Foundation "