9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2025 (2) TMI 814 - AT - Income TaxRejecting the application for registration u/s. 12AB - no compliance from the assessee on notice issued by CIT(E) - self-certified copies of annual accounts and note on activities of the applicant had not been furnished by the assessee thus CIT(E) could not verify the objects as well as activities of the assessee-trust HELD THAT - AR has contended before us that the assessee is ready to submit all details and evidences needed by the CIT(E) and one more opportunity may be given to the assessee. We find that assessee could not pursue his case before the CIT(E) by filing necessary evidences and documents. Hence we are of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to file relevant documents/evidences and to plead his case before the CIT(E). It is settled law that principles of natural justice requires that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Thus we restore the matter back to the file of CIT(E) for de novo adjudication and to pass a speaking order - Grounds of appeal are allowed for statistical purposes. Rejecting the application u/s 80G(5) due to late filing - As decided in FI FOUNDATION 2024 (9) TMI 424 - ITAT CHANDIGARH application of the assessee deserves to be examined on merits and cannot be dismissed as barred by limitation. There is no reason as to why the above decision would not be applicable to the facts of the instant appeal which are similar. Hence following the above decision the matter is remitted to the file of CIT(E) to admit the application of the assessee-trust as filed within the stipulated period and examine the same on merits as per law after granting reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee
ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED
The core legal questions considered in this judgment are:
ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS 1. Rejection of Application under Section 12AB Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: The legal framework involves Section 12AB of the Income-tax Act, which pertains to the registration of trusts and institutions for tax exemption purposes. The principles of natural justice require that parties be given a fair opportunity to present their case. Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Tribunal noted that the CIT(E) issued notices to the assessee, which were not complied with. The CIT(E) decided the case ex parte, leading to the rejection of the application. Key Evidence and Findings: The Tribunal found that the assessee failed to provide necessary documents and evidence to verify the genuineness of the trust's activities. Application of Law to Facts: The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of adhering to the principles of natural justice, which were not observed due to the ex parte decision. Treatment of Competing Arguments: The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for another opportunity to present its case, noting the CIT-DR's lack of objection. Conclusions: The Tribunal set aside the CIT(E)'s order and remitted the case for fresh adjudication, subject to the payment of costs by the assessee. 2. Delay in Filing Appeal Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: Section 253(3) of the Income-tax Act governs the time limits for filing appeals. The CBDT Circulars extending deadlines are also relevant. Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Tribunal considered the reasons for the delay, including reliance on CBDT Circulars extending deadlines. Key Evidence and Findings: The Tribunal found that the delay was not intentional and was supported by the CBDT Circular extending the deadline. Application of Law to Facts: The Tribunal determined that the reasons provided constituted "sufficient cause" for the delay. Treatment of Competing Arguments: The Tribunal found the CIT-DR's objection insufficient to outweigh the reasons provided by the assessee. Conclusions: The Tribunal condoned the delay and admitted the appeal for hearing. 3. Rejection of Application under Section 80G(5) Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: Section 80G(5) relates to the approval of institutions for donations eligible for tax deductions. The relevant CBDT Circulars provided extensions for filing applications. Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Tribunal analyzed the timelines and extensions provided by the CBDT Circulars. Key Evidence and Findings: The Tribunal noted the confusion regarding the applicability of extensions to Section 80G applications. Application of Law to Facts: The Tribunal recognized the applicability of the latest CBDT Circular, which extended the deadline to 30.06.2024. Treatment of Competing Arguments: The Tribunal considered the CIT-DR's reliance on the CIT(E)'s order but found the Circular's intent supported the assessee's position. Conclusions: The Tribunal remitted the matter to the CIT(E) for reconsideration, treating the previous application as within the extended deadline. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS Preserve Verbatim Quotes of Crucial Legal Reasoning: "It is settled law that principles of natural justice require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case." Core Principles Established: The Tribunal emphasized the importance of adhering to natural justice principles and the applicability of CBDT Circulars in extending deadlines. Final Determinations on Each Issue: The Tribunal allowed the appeals for statistical purposes, remanding the matters to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration, subject to specific conditions and deadlines.
|
