Case Law Details
Kalyan Riverside Charitable Foundation Vs CIT Exemption Pune (ITAT Mumbai)
Introduction: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in Mumbai recently addressed the appeals of Kalyan Riverside Charitable Foundation against the orders related to their registration under sections 12A and 80G of the Income Tax Act. The decision illuminates the critical importance of providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to an assessee.
Analysis: The appeal emerges from the Commissioner of Income Tax Exemption’s actions where the Foundation’s application for registration was rejected. Despite the Appellant being provided two notices to submit necessary details and evidence to support its claim, no compliance was observed. This non-compliance prompted the Commissioner to question the genuineness of the Foundation’s activities, leading to the rejection of the application.
The tribunal, after careful consideration, highlighted the pivotal aspect of ‘opportunity’. In light of the circumstances, ITAT decided to remand the case back to the Commissioner. This action aims to provide the Appellant another chance at presenting their case, supporting materials, and explaining their activities, reinforcing the essence of a fair hearing.
Furthermore, the decision on the denial of registration under section 80G, which inherently relies on the grant of registration under section 12, was also remanded for reconsideration.
Conclusion: The verdict accentuates the foundational principle of justice: providing a fair opportunity of being heard. ITAT Mumbai’s decision underlines the interdependency of sections 12 and 80G registrations and stresses the significance of compliance from the appellant’s end. The case serves as a precedent for entities to ensure timely and adequate responses to statutory notices.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT MUMBAI
These appeals have been preferred by the Assessee/Appellant herein against the orders even dated 29th Sep,2022 and 30th Sep, 2022 impugned herein, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax exemption, (in short ‘Ld. Commissioner’),u/s. 12A and 80G of the Act for the AY: 2022-2023.
2. None appeared on behalf of the Appellant inspite of sending notice for the date of hearing on 18.07.2023, hence considering peculiar facts and circumstances, we are deciding these appeals as ex-parte.
3. First we will decide T.A. No. 1055/Mum/2023 which pertains to challenge of the order rejecting the application for registration u/s 12 of the Act.
4. At the outset, we observe that the Appellant by filling online application on dated 31st March, 2022 in form no. 10AB sought registration under section 12A (1)(AC)(iii) of the Act. The same was taken into consideration by the Ld. Commissioner and vide notice issued through ITBA portal on 19th July, 2022, requested the Appellant to upload certain other information/clarification by 3rd Aug, 2022 which remains un-complied with. Thereafter, vide notice dated 18th Sep, 2022 another opportunity was given to the Appellant, whereby the Appellant was requested to submit its compliance by 23rd Sep, 2022. In the said notice, it was also specifically informed by the Ld. Commissioner that in the event of failure to comply by due date, the matter will be decided on the basis of material available on record. The said notice also remained un-complied with.
As the Appellant has not given any specific details, as to what actual activities being carried out by it and no credible evidence is submitted in support of its claim, though, specific opportunity of being heard was given, but failed to avail the same, the Ld. Commissioner therefore by observing “that as the Appellant has not uploaded the requisite details despite giving opportunities therefore, it is not possible to ascertain, as to whether the activities are in line with the objects of the trust/institution”, failed to draw any satisfactory conclusion about genuineness of the activities of the Appellant and ultimately rejected the aforesaid application of the Appellant.
5. We have given thoughtful consideration to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. No doubt the Ld. Commissioner before deciding the application filed by the Appellant, though given appropriate opportunity to the appellant to substantiate its case, however failed to decide the same in the absence of supported material and/ or non-production and non-explaining of documents and activities carried out by the appellant. Hence for the just decision of case and for the ends of substantial justice, we are remanding the instant case to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh, suffice to say for affording reasonable opportunity being heard to the Appellant.
The Appellant is also directed to join the appellant proceedings and to file the relevant documents before the ld. Commissioner and in case of default the Appellant shall not be entitled for any leniency. Hence
Resultantly I.T.A. No. 1055/Mum/2023 is allowed.
6. Coming to I.T.A. No. 1056/Mum/2023, which pertains to challenge to the denial of registration u/s 80G of the Act. Registration u/s 80G is depend upon the grant of registration u/s 12 of the Act, hence this case is also remanded to the file of ld. Commissioner for decisions afresh, with same terms and conditions as set out I.T.A. No. 1055/Mum/2023.
7. In the result, both the appeals filed by the Appellant stands allowed for the statistical proposes.
Orders pronounced in the open court on 20.07.2023.
