9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 764X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IT(Exemptions), Chandigarh has erred in law and on facts of the case, regarding while rejecting the application of the assessee seeking registration u/s 12AA disputed the issue of jurisdiction, since its being connected with one of the groups of search cases u/s 132 and the order u/s 127 the I.T. Act, 1961 was still stands in operation. The present application was disposed off as invalid, having been filed out of the jurisdiction without examining merits of the case. He requested for issuing appropriate direction to the CIT(E) to grant registration to the applicant assessee. 3. The facts of the from the record are that the Society was registered on 18.11.2005 and it has applied for registration u/s 12AA of The Income Tax 1961 on 08.09.2017 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd no incremental documents found during survey and the CIT (Exemptions) has wrongly passed the order without raising any objection on the aims & objects of the society and the activities of the society which is most essential part for granting registration. 6. The applicant assessee relies on Hon'ble Kolcutta High Court in case of 'Kumar & Brothers & Anr. Vs. UOI', 212 CTR 213 (Calcutta) where it was held that in the case of transfer of case under s. 127 from one city to the other, principles of natural justice have to be complied with by giving the assessee an opportunity of hearing-Further, reasons for such transfer must be recorded-Transfer of case of the petitioners from Kolkata to Mumbai-- No opportunity of hearing was given to the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Act. The ld A.R. contended that all the details required by the CIT(E), could have been furnished before him provided the assessee has been granted sufficient opportunity of being heard by way of communicating to the appellant the requisite details sought by the CIT. He further contended that it was only due to inadequate opportunity that the necessary material evidence by way of documentary evidence could not be made on the issue of change of jurisdiction in view of order u/s 127 of the Act passed if any in the case of the assessee. 10. The contention of the ld. AR that details required by the CIT were available with the assessee but the same could not be furnished due to lack of sufficient opportunity required to be granted to the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
