Case Law Details
Dnyanranjan Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Vs CIT (ITAT Pune)
The issue under consideration is whether the ex-parte order of the CIT (Exemptions) denying 80G exemption is justified in law?
In the present case, CIT(E) has passed ex-parte order for denying Section 80G exemption. The assessee states that the assessee had sufficient reasonable cause for not complying with the notices before the CIT (Exemptions) and non-appearance cannot be attributed to any deliberate misconduct of the assessee and the assessee is always a bonafide assessee and has always cooperated with the proceedings.
ITAT states that the reasons explained by the assessee for not complying with the notices before the CIT(Exemptions) cannot be attributed to any deliberate non-appearance or malafide intention of the assessee and principles of natural justice coupled with the fact that Income-tax legislation is welfare legislation, it is appropriate to provide another opportunity to assessee to present its case before the CIT(Exemptions). Therefore, ITAT set aside the order of CIT(Exemptions) and remand the matter back to his file to adjudicate the matter afresh. Thus, the grounds raised by assessee is allowed.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT
This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld. CIT(Exemptions), Pune, dated 30.09.2019.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in imparting education and running as many as five institutes, of which is non-granted and balance granted institutes. The assessee was granted registration u/s 12AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟).
However, the CIT(Exemptions) has denied the exemption claimed u/s 80G of the Act.
3. Aggrieved with the order the CIT(Exemptions), the assessee is in appeal before us.
4. The only issue in this is not granting of exemption u/s 80G of the Act.
5. At the very outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee is already having 12A certificate and there is an ex-parte order passed by CIT(Exemptions) denying 80G exemption to the assessee. Emphasizing the principles of natural justice, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee had sufficient reasonable cause for not complying with the notices before the CIT(Exemptions) and non-appearance cannot be attributed to any deliberate misconduct of the assessee and the assessee is always a bonafide assessee and has always cooperated with the proceedings.
6. Per contra, the submissions of ld. DR that two specific opportunities were granted to the assessee asking for submission of details in connection with 80G exemptions, then how the assessee failed to submit all those details before the authorities and therefore, the CIT(Exemptions) did not had any other option but to pass an ex-parte order.
7. Both the parties heard and after perusing the materials on record, we are of the opinion that the reasons explained by the assessee for not complying with the notices before the CIT(Exemptions) cannot be attributed to any deliberate non-appearance or malafide intention of the assessee neither at the time of hearing nor ld. DR could establish any deliberate malafide intention of the assessee and principles of natural justice coupled with the fact that Income-tax legislation is welfare legislation, it is appropriate to provide another opportunity to assessee to present its case before the CIT(Exemptions). We therefore, set aside the order of CIT(Exemptions) and remand the matter back to his file to adjudicate the matter afresh and at the same time, we direct the assessee to furnish all the details as asked for by the CIT(Exemptions) and present its case on merits. Thus, the grounds raised by assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
8. In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 3rd June, 2020.
Author Bio
