M/s Sunderlal Shiksha Sansthan, Indore v. The CIT - I, Indore

ITA 52/IND/2011 | 2010-2011
Pronouncement Date: 04-11-2011 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 5222714 RSA 2011
Assessee PAN AADAS0986K
Bench Indore
Appeal Number ITA 52/IND/2011
Duration Of Justice 5 month(s) 8 day(s)
Appellant M/s Sunderlal Shiksha Sansthan, Indore
Respondent The CIT - I, Indore
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 04-11-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted Not Allotted
Tribunal Order Date 04-11-2011
Assessment Year 2010-2011
Appeal Filed On 26-05-2011
Judgment Text
1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.C. SHARMA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.52/IND/2011 A.Y. 2010-11 SUNDERLAL SHIKSHA SANSTHAN INDORE PAN AADAS 0986 K ... APPELLANT VS CIT-I INDORE ... RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI P.N. DIXIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ARUN DEWAN DATE OF HEARING : 3.11.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 4.11.2011 O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGING THE ORDER DATED 27.4.2011 OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME TAX-I 2 INDORE ON THE GROUND THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE C IRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY ERRE D IN: (A) PASSING AN ORDER U/S 12AA(1)(B)(II) REFUSING RE GISTRATION IN VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. (B) NOT GRANTING REGISTRATION TO THE APPELLANT ASSE SSEE U/S 12AA. (C) NOT PASSING A SPEAKING ORDER. (D) NOT APPRECIATING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE FULLY TRULY AND IN AN OBJECTIVE MANNER. 2. DURING HEARING OF THIS APPEAL WE HAVE HEARD SHR I P.N. DIXIT LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI AR UN DEWAN LEARNED SR. DR. AT THE OUTSET THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER WAS PASS ED WITHOUT APPRECIATION OF FACTS. THE ASSESSEE ALSO CO NTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPLICATION TO THE OFFICE OF THE LD. CIT FOR INSPECTION OF RECORDS AND COPIES OF ORDER SHEET ENT RIES OF REGISTRATION PROCEEDINGS AND OTHER DOCUMENTS. A PLE A WAS ALSO RAISED THAT NO PERSONAL BENEFIT WAS DERIVED BY THE MEMBERS OF 3 THE SOCIETY. THE CRUX OF ARGUMENTS IS THAT PROPER O PPORTUNITY WAS NOT PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER THE LD. SR. DR DEFENDED THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PER USED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON FILE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOV E AND WITHOUT GOING INTO MERITS OF THE ORDER WE REMAND THIS FILE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH AFTER PROVID ING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE WITH FUR THER LIBERTY TO FURNISH EVIDENCE IF ANY TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM . FINALLY THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN IN THE PRESENCE O F LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH THE SIDES AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING. SD SDP (R.C.SHARMA) (JOGINDER SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 4.11.2011 COPY TO: APPELLANT RESPONDENT CIT CIT(A) DR GU ARD FILE !VYAS!