Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 4]

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Jodhpur

Mohanlal Sukhadia University, Udaipur vs Cit (Exemption), Jaipur on 10 May, 2019

        IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR

            BEFORE SHRI N.K.SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT AND
               SHRI A.T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER
                           ITA No. 52/Jodh/2019
                      (ASSESSMENT YEAR -2019-20)
     Mohanlal Sukhadia          Vs The CIT (Exemptions),
     Univeristy, Udaipur              Jaipur



     (Appellant)                  (Respondent)
                         PAN: AAAJM1548D

              Revenue By        Sh. K.C. Badhok, CIT DR

              Assessee By       None

            Date of hearing              08.05.2019

               Date of                    10.05.2019
            Pronouncement



                              ORDER

Per N.K. SAINI, V.P. :

This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 24.12.2018 of the CIT(Exemptions), Jaipur.

2. The only grievance of the assessee in this appeal relates to the rejection of the application moved by the assessee for registration u/s 12AA of the Act.

2

3. Facts of the case in brief are that the assessee filed an application in Form No. 10A seeking registration u/s 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') on-line on 21.6.2018. The. Ld. CIT(E) rejected the said application by observing that since opportunity had been provided to the assessee to produce details and documents in support of its claim for registration u/s 112AA of the Act but the assessee had failed to do so.

4. Now the assessee is in appeal.

5. Nobody was present on behalf of the assessee, however, the main grievance of the assessee was that no opportunity of being heard was provided by the Ld. CIT(E), therefore, the application moved by the assessee was rejected in violation of principles of natural justice.

6. In his rival submissions, the Ld. Sr. DR supported the order passed by the Ld. CIT(E).

7. We have considered the submissions of Ld. Sr. DR and perused the material available on record. In the present case it is noticed that the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application moved by the assessee by observing that an opportunity was provided vide letter dated 6.12.2018 to the assessee but on the given date neither anybody was present nor any reply was filed. From the above observation of the Ld. CIT(E), it is not 3 clear as to whether the notice for hearing was served upon the assessee because the Ld. CIT(E) simply stated that opportunity was provided vide letter dated 6.12.2018 but nowhere he stated that the said letter / notice was served upon the assessee. It is well settled that nobody should be condemned unheard as per the maxim "audi alteram partem". We, therefore, by keeping in view the principles of natural justice, deem it appropriate to set aside this case back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) to be adjudicated afresh in accordance with law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

(Order Pronounced in the Court on 10.05.2019) Sd/- Sd/-

      (A.T. VARKEY)                                        (N.K. SAINI)
      Judicial Member                                      Vice President
Dated : 10. 05.2019
"आर.के."

आदे शक त ल पअ े षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :

1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant
2. यथ / The Respondent
3. आयकरआयु त/ CIT
4. आयकरआयु त (अपील)/ The CIT(A)
5. वभागीय त न ध, आयकरअपील यआ धकरण, च#डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, Jodhpur
6. गाड&फाईल/ Guard File 4 आदे शानस ु ार/ By order सहायकपंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar