2021 (7) TMI 709 - AT - Income Tax

Registration u/s 12AA and 80G - genuineness of activities is not established by the assessee and further that assessee has not been granted registration u/s 12AA - HELD THAT - We find that the assessee filed application under section 80G 12AA of the Act on 03.09.2020 in prescribed form under relevant Rule of Income Tax Rules - we find that ld. CIT(E) dismissed/rejected both the application of assessee for the want of sufficient information about the genuineness of activities of the assessee - the assessee vehemently submitted that no notice was received from the office of ld. CIT(E) - assessee placed on record the copy of screenshot of ITBA portal, wherein the email address of assessee is not mentioned correctly. The assessee was not served notice due to wrong reference of email address, therefore, in our view the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause for not furnishing the required details about the genuineness of activities - we deem it appropriate to restore both the appeals to the file of ld. CIT(E) to consider the application(s) of assessee afresh. Both the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

Summary

Issues:
1. Rejection of applications for registration under sections 12AA and 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption).
2. Allegation of not receiving notices due to an incorrect email address.
3. Appeal against the dismissal of applications under sections 12AA and 80G.

Analysis:
1. The appeals were against the rejection of applications for registration under sections 12AA and 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption). The ld. CIT(E) dismissed both applications citing lack of evidence regarding the genuineness of the activities undertaken by the assessee. The assessee, a charitable trust, failed to respond to notices and furnish required details, leading to the rejection of the applications. The ld. CIT(E) concluded that without registration under section 12AA, the assessee was ineligible for approval under section 80G(5), resulting in the dismissal of the applications.

2. The assessee claimed not to have received notices due to an incorrect email address provided by the ld. CIT(E). The ld. Authorized Representative (AR) for the assessee argued that the incorrect email address, which prevented the receipt of notices, constituted sufficient cause for the lack of response. The AR presented evidence of the correct email address to support this claim. The AR requested the restoration of the appeals to the ld. CIT(E) for a fresh consideration, emphasizing the charitable nature and genuineness of the activities carried out by the assessee.

3. Upon hearing both parties and examining the records, the Tribunal found merit in the assessee's argument regarding the incorrect email address leading to the non-receipt of notices. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to restore both appeals to the ld. CIT(E) for a fresh review. The ld. CIT(E) was directed to provide the assessee with an opportunity for a hearing and to ensure that all necessary details and documents regarding the activities undertaken were furnished. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes, emphasizing the importance of due process and proper communication in such matters.