9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 582X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een given reasonable opportunity of being heard. Reasonable opportunity of being heard is to be given and the fact that in the past, adjournments had been sought for would not be of any materiality. In the present case, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court directed the Ld. Pr. CIT vide order dt. 17/03/2021 to dispose off the objections raised by the assessee and the letters furnished in the response to the show cause notice. However, the Ld. Pr. CIT, without providing any opportunity of being heard to the assessee passed the impugned order on 22/03/2021 exparte which is against the provisions contained in proviso to sub section 3 of section 12AA of the Act. No assessment was framed by the A.O. therefore it is not clear that how and in what manner the Ld. Pr. CIT considered the details examined by the A.O. when the assessment had not been completed by the A.O - Pr. CIT while cancelling the registration of the assessee trust considered the provisions contained in section 11, 12 and 13 of the Act and also mentioned that to decide the eligibility of section 12AA of the Act subsequently after having been granted earlier, the tests to be applied are as to whether the activity ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ical purposes. - ITA NO. 96/Chd/2021, 97/Chd/2021 & 98/Chd/2021 - - - Dated:- 31-8-2021 - SHRI. N.K.SAINI, VP AND SHRI, R.L. NEGI, JM Assessee by: Shri M.S. Syali, Sr. Advocate, Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate And Shri Tarandeep Singh, Advocate Revenue by: Smt. Chandrakanta, CIT ORDER PER N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT These appeals by the Assessees are directed against the separate orders each dt. 22/03/2021 of the Pr. CIT(C)-Gurgaon. 2. Since the issues involved are common in all these appeals which were heard together, so these are being disposed off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 3. At the first instance we will deal with the appeal in ITA No. 96/Chd/2021 wherein the assessee has raised the following grounds: 1. That on facts and in law the order passed by Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-Gurgaon { PCIT-Gurgaon } u/s 12AA(3)/(4) of the Act is bad in Law and void abinitio. 1.1.1 That the order passed is void and unsustainable inter alia for the following reasons: (a) That it grossly violates principles of natural justice, fair play and Equity mandated by law. (b) That it lac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e provision of section 13(1)(c) or 13(d) are applicable in the case in hand, cancellation of registration in unwarranted both on facts and in law and at best, the relevant income qua which the exemption under section 11 and 12 shall not operate, by virtue of section 13(1)(c) r.w.s 13(1)(d) r.w.s 164(2), may be charged to tax at maximum marginal rate of tax. 8. That the appellant prays for leave to add, alter, amend and/or vary the ground(s) of appeal at or before the time of hearing. 4. The main grievance of the assessee relates to the cancellation of the Registration granted under section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act ). Vide Ground No. 3 and 3.1 which was argued at the first instance, the assessee contended that the Ld. PCIT(C) without waiting the appraisal report of the A.O. and without giving opportunity of being heard, invoked and exercised the Jurisdiction under section 12AA(3) 12AA(4) of the Act. 5. The facts of the case in brief are that the assessee is a society / Trust which was created for charitable purpose and registered under the Society Registration Act (XXI of 1860) vide Registration No. 2650 of 2009-10 on 28.10.2009. The asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 12 of the Act on account of Registration of Trust under section 12AA of the Act. The year wise details of Income Expenditure account shown by the assessee Trust in its ITR s from A.Y. 2013-14 to 2019-20 are mentioned at page no. 3 and 4 of the impugned order by Pr. CIT(C) for the cost of repetition the same is not reproduced herein. The Ld. Pr. CIT(C) observed that the assessee is a closely held society solely controlled and managed by Shri Satnam Singh Sandhu and his family members since beginning and that Shri Satnam Singh Sandhu is Chairman of the assessee society whereas his wife Smt. Damandeep Kaur is the General Secretary and his mother-in-law Smt. Jasmail Kaur is the Finance Secretary. In other words, all the three posts of Governing body were held by Sandhu family. Ld. Pr. CIT(C) further observed that as per Clause-5 of the Rules and Regulation of the society framed in accordance with the object of the society, these three persons are empowered to accept or reject any application for the membership of the society and as per Clause 15(b) of the Rules and Regulations, all assets and funds of the society belong to the society and not to any individual member / Officer bear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5.3 The Ld. Pr. CIT after considering the submissions of the assessee observed that the proceedings under section 12AA of the Act are entirely different from the assessment proceedings under section 153A or 143(3) or 147 of the Act and that what was to be tested under section 12AA(3) was whether the activities of the Trust were as per its object or not and whether activities of the Trust are being genuinely carried out or not. He further observed that whether the income of the assessee Trust enures for the benefit of public and any income or property of the trust was not used or applied directly or indirectly for the benefit of specified persons like author of the trust, trustees etc. and that the said conclusion would be based on the seized material, findings of the search and post search proceedings. According to the Pr. CIT there was no requirement that the Commissioner should wait till conclusion of assessment / appellate proceedings for cancellation of registration, the reference was made to following case laws: U.P. Forest Corporation Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Lucknow [2008] 297 ITR 1 (SC) U.P. Distillers Association Vs. Commissioner of Income- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Trust or Institution were being carried out in a manner that the provisions of Section 11 12 do not apply to exclude either whole or any part of the income of such Trust or Institution due to operation of Sub Section 1 of Section 13 of the Act which provide that where a Trust or an Institution has been granted registration and subsequently it is noticed that its activities are being carried out in such a manner that (i) its income does not enure for the benefit of the public; (ii) it is for benefit of any particular religious community or caste (in case it is established after commencement of the Income-tax Act, 1961); (iii) any income or property of the trust is used or applied directly or indirectly for the benefit of specified persons like author of trust, trustees etc.; or (iv) its funds are not invested in specified modes, then the Pr. CIT may cancel the registration, if such Trust or Institution does not prove that there was a reasonable cause for the activities to be carried out in the aforesaid manner. 5.8 The Ld. Pr. CIT further observed that the grant of registration under section 12AA is only a procedural provisions and a condition preced ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arry out its activities genuinely is bound to follow the law of land regarding correct and complete maintenance of books of account required for furnishing audit report in Form 10B under section 12A(b) of the Act and if it is violated, the trust could not be said to be genuinely carrying out its activities. Thus, the requirement of recording of all receipts/expenses in the books is of paramount importance to meet the condition of application of income u/s 11 (1)(a) and in absence of all receipts/expenses being recorded properly in the books, the condition mandated u/s 11(1)(a) would fail, which would in turn make activities of the trust as not being carried genuinely as per its charitable objects. 9.5 Thus, even if a trust registered u/s 12AA claims to be carrying out and deriving income from its activities of providing education etc. but the genuineness of its activities or its existence solely for charitable purposes can still be challenged if it; (i) drives its income not from a source/property held under the trust (ii) derives its income in the manner which is prohibited by law (iii) The trust does not record entire receipts or expenses in the books of account which preve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 11(1)(a) of the Act would fail. Therefore the condition to satisfy application of income for charitable purpose and also to meet the ceiling of accumulation of not more than 15% of such income as provided under section 11(1)(a) of the Act were absent in the case of the assessee, hence the argument of the assessee that the same were utilized for the objects of the trust has no legs to stand. 5.12 Ld. Pr. CIT observed that applying the test for continuance of registration under section 12AA of the Act, it was apparent that if the expenses were not recorded properly or were unverifiable or were utilized for personal benefit of the trustees in violation of the provisions of section 13(1) of the Act then the trust could not be said to be carrying out its activities genuinely and solely for the purposes of its objects, even if the part of its receipt / expenses were unaccounted. According to the Ld. Pr CIT the assessee was indulged in siphoning off its funds by booking bogus expenses and diversion of its funds to its trustees which had been summarized as under: a) Diversion of funds amounting to ₹ 14,21,17,932/- during FY 2019-20 under the head 'Fee'. b) Div ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and that the assessee was indulged in siphoning off its funds by booking bogus expenses and diversion of its funds to its trustees in clear violation of the provisions of section 12AA(4) r.w.s 13(1) of the Act. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) Vs. Jagannath Gupta Family Trust [2019] 102 taxmann.com 34 (SC) Ram Bhawan Dharamshala Vs. State of Rajasthan [2002] 124 Taxman 149 (Raj.) Agappa Child Centre [1997] 226 ITR 211 (Ker) DIT (Exem). Vs. Charanjiv Charitable Trust [2014] 43 taxmann.com 300 (Delhi) CIT-II, Lucknow Vs. Audh Educational Society [2011] 15 taxmann.com 235(All) Kanahya Lal Punj Charitable Trust Vs. DIT (Exem.) [2008] 171 Taxman 134 (Delhi) Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. V.G.P. Foundation (Madras High Court) Tax Case No. 31 of 1998 Oct. 8, 2002 Parivar Sewa Sanstha Vs. Deputy Director of Income-tax [2005] 1 SOT 71 (Del) Action for Welfare Awakening in Rural Environment (AWARE) Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax [2003] 130 Taxman 82 (AP) Little Tradition Vs. Deputy Director of Income-tax (Exemption), Trust Circle-IV, New Delhi [2009] 119 ITD 127 ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... buttressed by the fact that sub section (4) of section 13 of the Act gives the specific situation where notwithstanding what is there in section 13(1)(c) of the Act, exemption under section 11 12 of the Act will be denied only on part of the income and that the assessee was not covered by this sub section. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: Director of Income Tax Vs. Bharat Diamond Bourse (2003) 179 CTR SC 225 (SC) Agappa Child Centre Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax [1997] 226 ITR 211 (Ker.) Director of Income-tax(Exemption) Vs. Charanjiv Charitable Trust (2014) 43 taxmann.com 300 (Del) Pt. Kanahya Lal Punj Charitable Trust Vs. Director of Income Tax [2008] 297 ITR 66 (Del) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s Audh Educational Society [2011] 203 Taxman 0166 (All.) Tekprolu Bapanaiah, Vidyadharma Nidhi Trust Vs. CIT [1987] 167 ITR 482 399(AP). 5.16 The Ld. Pr CIT was of the view that once the provisions of section 13(1)(c) r.w.s 13(3) of the Act are invoked, surplus is brought to tax, payment made in excess of what is reasonable is disallowed and added to income and the total income so calculated is taxed at maximum margina ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Act shall exercise all the powers and perform the functions as stipulated in the Act in respect of all the proceedings which may be commenced after the date of such order in respect of any year. The reference was made to the following case laws: Hind Charitable Trust Vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, (Centra), Lucknow [2018] 93 taxmann.com 483(All.) Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Pune Vs. Sungard Solutions(I) (P.) Ltd. [2019] 105 taxmann.com 67 (Bom) 5.19 The Ld. Pr. CIT(Central),Gurugram was of the view that he shall exercise all the powers and perform all the functions as stipulated in the Act in respect of the present case which was assigned under section 127 of the Act to the A.O. viz. ACIT Central Circle-2, Chandigarh who is subordinate to Pr. CIT(Centra), Gurugram and that such power includes cancellation of registration under section 12AA of the Act. 5.20 As regards to the decision of the ITAT Jaipur Bench in the case of Wholesale Cloth Merchant Association Vs. PCIT(Central), Jaipur in ITA No. 688/JP/2019 relied by the assessee, the Ld. Pr. CIT observed that the facts of the said case were different from the assessee s case for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of writ petition or otherwise and if no such challenge is made at initial state, issue cannot be raised in an appeal against the assessment order and that the validity of the order under section 127 of the Act cannot be challenged in the proceedings for cancellation of registration under section 12AA(3)/12AA(4) of the Act. Reliance was placed on the following case laws: Smt. Jaswinder Kaur Kooner Vs. CIT(A)(2007) 291 ITR 80 (P H) A.R. Antulay Vs. R.S. Nayak Anr. on 29 April, 1988, 1988 AIR 1531, 1988 SCR Supl. (1) 1(SC) 5.22 As regards to the issue that as to whether Section 127 of the Act empowers transfers of the jurisdiction of the cases amongst the A.O. only and not amongst the Commissioner of Income Tax, as a Commissioner is not an Assessing Officer and as per Notification Nos. 52/2014 53/2014 and the provisions of Section 120 127 of the Act, the Ld. CIT(E) cannot transfer his power to cancel the registration under section 12AA of the Act to other CIT of same rank and whether for doing so there has to be proper and separate proceedings in writing and an order in writing from higher authorities such as Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) Delhi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uthorities, the matter is required to be referred to the Board which in turn decides the issue of transfer or the CBDFT can then authorize an Income Tax Authority by notification as stipulated in clause(b) of sub section (2) of section 127 of the Act. The Ld. Pr. CIT observed that once transfer order of case of an assessee is issued under section 127 of the Act the legal effect will be that (i) all the proceedings of the assessee under the Act in respect of any year which may be pending on the date of such order will stand transferred, (ii) all the completed assessment order of the assessee on or before the date of transfer will also stand transferred and (iii) all proceedings under the Act in respect of the assessee which may be commenced after the date of such transfer order have to be undertaken by the transferred new A.O. 5.25 As regards to the jurisdiction over the assessee s case, the Pr. CIT held that the ACIT/DCIT, Circle-1(E), Chandigarh was divested of his jurisdiction over the assessee and the jurisdiction stood transferred in favour of ACIT / DCIT, CC-2 Chandigarh by observing as under: j. The jurisdiction over the assessee's case initially was vested with th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lowing case laws: Ramshila Enterprises (P.) Ltd. Vs. PCIT [2016] 68 taxmann.com 270 (Cal) Principal CIT, Pune Vs. Sungard Solutions (I) (P.) Ltd. [2019] 105 taxmann.com 67 (Bom) 5.26 The Ld. Pr. CIT observed that Ld. CIT(E) does not exercise any jurisdiction in respect of the person claiming exemption under section 11 and 12 of the Act which have been assigned to the A.O. subordinate to Pr. CIT(Central) Gurgaon under section 127 of the Act. He also observed that once an order under section 127 of the Act is passed transferring the jurisdiction of the person, the transferee Income-tax Authorities as mentioned in section 116 of the Act shall exercise all the powers and perform the functions as stipulated in the Act in respect of all the proceedings which may be commenced after the date of such order in respect of any year and such power includes passing the order registering a trust and also cancelling the registration. He further observed that once the registration is granted without carrying any enquiry then any violation found subsequently in any year would trigger the denial of exemption of section 115TD which tax the entire accreted income upon cancellation o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a Vs. CIT Hubli, 71 Taxmann.com 152 (Bangalore Trib) Indian Medical Trust Vs. Pr. CIT(Central)Jaipur [2018] 99 taxmann.com 273 (Jaipur Trib) Young Indian Vs. CIT(E), New Delhi [2019] 111 Taxmann.com 235 (Delhi-Trib) U.P. Distillers Association (IT Appeal 830 of 2017) (Del HC) 6. Now the assessee is in appeal. 7. The main grievance of the assessee is that the Pr. CIT neither gave any opportunity of being heard nor awaited examination by a competent Authority, vitiating the order passed and that he acted merely on the allegations, suspicions and surmises in the Report of the Investigation Wing without awaiting its appraisal by a Quasi Judicial Assessing Officer. 7.1 Ld. Counsel for the Assessee reiterated the submissions made before the Ld. Pr. CIT and submitted a Chart relating to the sequence of events, copy of which is placed at page no. 1 and 1A of the assessee s paper book which read as under: S. No. Date Event 1. 22.02.2011 Registration Granted u/s 12AA 2. 2012 Chand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Writ Petition disposed of by Hon'ble P H High Court. Hon'ble High Court has held as under: Limited grievance of the petitioner is that show cause notice, and Annexure P-5 has been issued to it by the authority having no jurisdiction in the matter. Besides, the notice is premature as assessment proceedings are yet to be completed in the first instance. He submits that he had already submitted a reply to the show cause notice but no response has been received. Notice of motion. At this stage, Mr Tejender Joshi, advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondent. He' submits in case reply to the show cause notice has been received, same shall be decided by the concerned authority at the earliest in any case not later than one month. In view of above, no further adjudication of the matter is necessary. Petition is disposed of. 13. 22.03.2021 Cancellation order passed by the Pr. CIT(C) cancelling the registration of societies u/s 12AA 14. 30.03.2021 Notice u/s 148 issued by AO for AY 2013-14 15. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the Ld. ACIT, CC-2,Chandigarh on 07/09/2020, in response to thereof the assessee filed the return of income on 19/10/2020, the A.O. issued notice under section 143(2) of the Act for selecting the return of income filed under section 153A of the Act for scrutiny on 05/11/2020 and again issued detailed questionnaire under section 142(1) of the Act on 21/11/2020. Thereafter, the Ld. Pr. CIT issued the notice for cancellation of the registration under section 12AA of the Act on 24/11/2020, in response thereto, the assessee filed partial reply dt. 04/1/2021 and 01/02/2021raising the objections that the jurisdictional A.O. was parallel conducting the investigation in the matter and he would yet to form an opinion after taking into consideration the findings of the investigation wing and the replies of the assesse who sought additional time for submitting the detailed reply on merit of the allegations levied in show cause notice. However the Ld. Pr. CIT had not disposed off the objections raised by the assessee therefore, a writ petition was filed before the Hon'ble P H High Court against the show cause notice so issued for cancellation of the registration under section 12AA of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (I)(P.) Ltd. reported in 415 ITR 294 (Bombay) State Bank of India Vs. Chandra Govindji(Km.) reported in (2000) 8 SCC 532 (SC) GKN Driveshaft (India) Ltd. Vs. ITO Ors. reported in (2003) 1 SCC 72 (SC) P.N. Eswara Iyer and Ors. Vs. Registrar, Supreme Court of India reported in (1980) 4 SCC 680 (SC) Kalinga Institute of Industrial Technology Vs. CIT reported in 113 TTJ 906 (Cuttack) Kalinga Institute of Industrial Technology Vs. CIT reported in 336 ITR 389 (Orissa) Maharashtra Academy of Engineering Education Research Vs. CIT reported in 133 TTJ 706 (Pune) Hind Charitable Trust Vs. PCIT in Misc. Bench No. 7201 of 2018, order dated 11.04.2018 of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court. Orient (Goa) Ltd. Vs. DCIT reported in 66 ITD 479 (Pune) 7.6 It was contended that the material which was required, was furnished before the A.O, however, the Ld. Pr. CIT did not wait for the order passed by the A.O. on merit and did not give any opportunity of being heard after the direction was given by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court to dispose off the objection and to consider the earlier written submissions furnished in part by the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submitted that the Hon'ble High Court directed the Ld. Pr. CIT to dispose off the objection furnished by the assessee which had been disposed off, therefore, the directions given by the Hon'ble High Court were complied by the Ld. Pr. CIT. It was also stated that reasonable opportunity of being heard was provided to the assessee on 05/01/2021, 19/01/2021 and 01/02/2021. Therefore it cannot be said that a due and reasonable opportunity of being heard was not given to the assessee. The Ld. CIT DR furnished the copy of the order sheet which is placed at page no. 1 2 of the paper book furnished by the Department. It was stated that a show cause notice under section 12AA(3) / 12AA(4) of the Act for cancellation of registration granted under section 12AA of the Act on 25/02/2014 in case of the assessee was issued on 23/11/2020, in response to which the assessee furnished email dt. 05/12/2020 and requested for adjournment on the request of the assessee, the case was fixed for hearing on 05/01/2021, on the said date the counsel for the assessee appeared and furnished the submission. Again, the matter was adjourned to 19/01/2021, on the said dated the counsel for the assessee atte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e that the Ld. Pr. CIT passed the impugned order exparte on 22/03/2021 and cancelled the registration already granted to the assessee under section 12AA of the Act by invoking the provisions of section 12AA(3)/12AA(4) of the Act. The said provisions read as under: 12AA. (3) Where a trust or an institution has been granted registration under clause (b) of sub-section(1) or has obtained registration at any time under section 12A as it stood before its amendment by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1996 (33 of 1996) and subsequently the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner is satisfied that the activities of such trust or institution are not genuine or are not being carried out in accordance with the objects of the trust or institution, as the case may be, he shall pass an order in writing cancelling the registration of such trust or institution. Provided that no order under this sub-section shall be passed unless such trust or institution has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. (4) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section(3), where a trust or an institution has been granted registration under clause (b) of sub-section(1) or has obtained regist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ereof by fair minded judges. Presentation can be written or oral, depending on the justice of the situation. Where oral persuasiveness is necessary it is unfair to exclude it and therefore, arbitrary too. But where oral presentation is not that essential, its exclusion is not obnoxious. What is crucial is the guarantee of the application of an instructed, intelligent, impartial and open mind to the points presented. From the ratio laid down in the aforesaid referred to cases it would be clear that the reasonable opportunity of being heard is to be given and the fact that in the past, adjournments had been sought for would not be of any materiality. In the present case, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court directed the Ld. Pr. CIT vide order dt. 17/03/2021 to dispose off the objections raised by the assessee and the letters furnished in the response to the show cause notice. However, the Ld. Pr. CIT, without providing any opportunity of being heard to the assessee passed the impugned order on 22/03/2021 exparte which is against the provisions contained in proviso to sub section 3 of section 12AA of the Act. 11.2 In the present case the Ld. Pr. CIT himself admitted at pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... registration should be in consonance with the provisions. In the instant case, the Commissioner had proposed the cancellation proceeding on the basis of the finding of the search and seizure operation. Therefore, the question far consideration arose as to whether the Commissioner should have waited till the final asses sment was completed or not. The apprehension of the revenue regarding continuance of registration to be against the interest of the correct on one hand; on the other hand, the cancellation of registration meant a great block for the assessee-society/trust to continue its activities. Therefore, despite the fact that the 'had disclosed a sizeable amount for reasons best known to it, simply should not be a basis for immediate cancellation of registration without final determination/assessment in the search and seizure proceedings. It was premature and in clear cut judicial terms it was like hanging a person before pronouncement of a judgment. Even otherwise, going through the cancellation order of the Commissioner that the basis of cancellation was the search and seizure proceeding alone. No other finding depicted in the order. The Commissioner's apprehens ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ter the direction given by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court on 17/03/2021 and the impugned order passed by the Ld. Pr. CIT on 22/03/2021 exparte, against the provisions as contained in the proviso of sub section 3 of section 12AA of the Act which provides that the reasonable opportunity of being heard is to be provided before cancellation the registration. In that view of the matter the impugned order passed by the Ld. Pr. CIT (Central) is set aside and the issue is remanded back to his file to be adjudicated afresh in accordance with law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and also by keeping in view the findings given by the A.O. as regards to the violation of the provisions contained in Section 13(1)(c) of the Act, if any. 12. Since the issue involved in other appeals of the assessees i.e; ITA No. 97/Chd/2021 and ITA No. 98/Chd/2021 are similar and the facts are identical, therefore our findings given in the former part of this order in respect of ITA No. 96/Chd/2021 shall apply mutatis mutandis to those appeals also. 13. In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes. (Order pronounced in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
