9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 164X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the same afresh after giving an appropriate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Though the assessee has raised various objections against the jurisdiction invoked by the CIT(E) however, since these objections could not be raised before and considered by the CIT(E) while passing the impugned ex parte order therefore, the same may be raised before the CIT(E) in the set aside proceedings and after considering the same, the CIT(E) shall pass afresh orders - Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. - ITA No. 190/ALLD/2018 - - - Dated:- 3-8-2021 - SHRI. VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant by : Mr. Pawan Jaiswal, C.A. Respondent by : Mr. Shantanu Dhamija, CIT DR ORDER PER SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER : This appeal by the assessee is directed against revision order dated 28.02.2018 passed under section 263 of Income Tax Act by Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Lucknow for assessment year 2013-14. The assessee has raised the following grounds: 1 Because the CIT(E) has erred in law and facts in holding that in assessment order dated 30.03.2016. Allahabad was erroneous and pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been fulfilled, the order dated 28,02,2018/- passed by the CIT (E) is bad and the same is liable to be quashed. 7. Because the order dated 28.03.2018 is based on erroneous and considerations and the same is not sustainable either on facts or in law. 8. Because in any case the ex-parte order dated 28.02.2018 passed by CIT (E) is completely bad as the same has been made without giving due and proper opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 9. Because the order appealed against is contrary to the facts, law and principles of natural justice. 2. The assessee is a charitable trust and registered u/s 12AA of the Income Tax Act. The assessee has filed its return of income for the year under consideration on 30.03.2015 declaring nil income after claiming exemption u/s 11 and 12 of the Act. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny through CASS and the AO has completed scrutiny assessment u/s 143(3) at a total income of Rs. Nil but, however, the anonymous donations of ₹ 1,97,69,650/- were charged to tax by AO under section 115BBC. Subsequently, the CIT(E) had examined the assessment record and noted that the assessee trust has shown donation of &# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t that the Assessing Officer has made an addition on account of anonymous donation. He has pointed out that the assessee challenged the assessment order by filing an appeal before the CIT(A) which is pending. Therefore once the issue is pending in the appeal filed by the assessee before the CIT(A) the CIT(E) is not permitted to invoke the provisions of section 263 on the same issue. He has further contended that the CIT(E) has also not granted an effective hearing to the assessee before passing an impugned order. The hearing of the case was fixed by the CIT(E) on 28th February, 2018 by issuing a show cause and there was no further notice or opportunity was granted by the CIT(E) to the assessee but the impugned order was passed on the same date. Therefore, the impugned order was passed in a haste without giving an appropriate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. He has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Amitabh Bachhan 384 ITR 200 and submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that opportunity of hearing prior to finalization of order under section 263 is a condition precedent. Therefore, not granting of appropriate opportu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntary proof. He has supported the impugned order of the CIT(E) passed under section 263 of the Act. 6. We have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant materials on record. The scrutiny assessment in the case of the assessee was completed by AO u/s 143(3) at a total income of Rs. Nil but, however, the anonymous donations of ₹ 1,97,69,650/- were charged to tax by AO under section 115BBC. The CIT(E) noticed that the Assessing Officer has not completed the assessment as per the provisions of section 13(7) of the Income Tax Act. The Commissioner was also of the view that the Assessing Officer failed to make proper enquiry to ascertain the possible nexus between the society and the donors which attracted the provisions of section 68 of the Income Tax Act. The Commissioner also observed that the AO erred in not charging interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Act. The Commissioner has , thus , passed the impugned order dated 28.02.2018 thereby the assessment order was set aside by holding the same as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue in as much as the AO has completed the assessment without proper application of mind and examination of the claim of e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
