2019 (4) TMI 614 - AT - Income Tax

Exemption u/s 80G(5)(vi) - delay in filing of appeal - not complied by concern person being an old man of 69 years and suffering from various ailments - CIT rejected vide exparte order without going into merits by passing non-speaking order - HELD THAT - we find that owing to peculiar medical conditions of the accountant being an old man, the assessee s case could not be represented in appropriate manner. Therefore, assessee s case requires reconsideration by the ld. CIT(Exemption). - set aside the order of the ld. CIT and remanded back for reconsideration.

Summary

Issues:
1. Delay in filing the appeal
2. Rejection of exemption under section 80G(5)(vi) of the Income Tax Act
3. Non-granting of proper opportunity to explain the case
4. Passing of ex-parte order without considering merits

Analysis:
1. Delay in filing the appeal:
The appeal was filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(Exemption), Bhopal, dated 20.1.2017, which was found to be time-barred by one month. The counsel for the assessee explained that the delay was due to the accountant's medical conditions. The accountant, an old man of 69 years, had forgotten to give the order to the trustees due to his health issues, including cardiac problems. The delay was condoned by the Tribunal in the interest of justice after considering the facts and the affidavit supporting the application for condonation of delay.

2. Rejection of exemption under section 80G(5)(vi) of the Income Tax Act:
The assessee, registered under section 12AA, had applied for approval under section 80G(5)(vi) with the relevant documents. However, the ld. CIT passed an ex-parte order without considering the merits of the case. The Tribunal found that the accountant's medical conditions had hindered the proper representation of the assessee's case. The Tribunal set aside the order of the ld. CIT and remanded the issues back for reconsideration. The ld. CIT was directed to review the submissions, relevant documents, and case laws before deciding the matter afresh, providing the assessee with a due opportunity to be heard.

3. Non-granting of proper opportunity to explain the case:
The assessee contended that the notices for hearing were received by the accountant, who failed to communicate the compliance requirements to the trustees due to his health issues. As a result, the assessee could not be represented adequately, leading to the passing of an ex-parte order by the ld. CIT. The Tribunal acknowledged the peculiar medical conditions of the accountant and deemed it necessary for the ld. CIT to reconsider the case after affording the assessee a fair opportunity to present their case.

4. Passing of ex-parte order without considering merits:
The Tribunal observed that the ld. CIT had passed a non-speaking order without delving into the merits of the case. Considering the medical conditions of the accountant and the impact on the representation of the case, the Tribunal directed the ld. CIT to reevaluate the matter, taking into account the submissions, relevant medical reports, and case laws. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes only, emphasizing the importance of providing a fair hearing and due process in tax matters.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's judgment addressed the issues of delay in filing the appeal, rejection of exemption under section 80G(5)(vi), non-granting of proper opportunity to explain the case, and passing of an ex-parte order, ensuring that the assessee's case was reconsidered with due process and fair opportunity to be heard.