Ananda Social and Educational Trust, Bangalore v. Dy.DIT, Bangalore

ITA 912/BANG/2014 | 1996-1997
Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2015 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 91221114 RSA 2014
Bench Bangalore
Appeal Number ITA 912/BANG/2014
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 21 day(s)
Appellant Ananda Social and Educational Trust, Bangalore
Respondent Dy.DIT, Bangalore
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 31-07-2015
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted C
Tribunal Order Date 31-07-2015
Date Of Final Hearing 17-07-2015
Next Hearing Date 17-07-2015
Assessment Year 1996-1997
Appeal Filed On 09-07-2014
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH C BEFORE SHRI VIJAYPAL RAO JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JASON P BOAZ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.912 & 917/BANG/2014 (ASST. YEAR - 1996-97 & 2001-02) M/S ANANDA SOCIAL & EDUCATIONAL TRUST NO.24 KADUGONDANAHALLI BANGALORE. . APPELLANT VS. THE DY. DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE-17(1) BANGALORE. . RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI S SUKUMAR ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : DR. SHANKAR PRASAD K JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 17-7-2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31-7-2015 O R D E R PER BENCH : THESE SIX APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAI NST THE COMPOSITE ORDER DATED 5/5/2014 OF COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME-TAX (APPEALS) VI FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1996-97 TO 2 001-02. ITA NOS.912 - 9 17/B/14 2 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED COMMON GROUNDS IN THESE APPEALS EXCEPT THE QUANTUM OF ADDITION VARIES IN DIFFERENT ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE GROUNDS RAISED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1996-97 ARE AS UNDER: I. DENIAL OF OPPORTUNITY/VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE: 1. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THAT NO ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY WAS GRANTED BY THE AO EVEN THOUGH THERE IS NO TIME LIMIT TO GIVE EFFECT TO THE HONBLE HIGH COURTS ORDER. 2. THE CIT(A) IS NOT CORRECT IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO WITH RESPECT TO: A. NOT PROVIDING THE REASON FOR REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT WHICH IS AGAINST THE DIRECTION OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA THE SAME WAS NOT PROVIDED TO THE APPELLANT DURING THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT. B. NOT PERMITTED THE APPELLANT THE OPPORTUNITY FOR INSPECTION OF RECORDS THOUGH THE APPELLANT MADE REQUEST IN WRITING. C. NOT PROVIDING THE COPY OF THE REPORT OF ALLEGED SURVEY CONDUCTED ON 6.3.2002 AS STATED BY THE AO AND LATER ON TERMED AS SURVEY/ENQUIRY BY THE CIT(A). ITA NOS.912 - 9 17/B/14 3 D. NOT PROVIDING THE PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE U/S 148 AND U/S 143(2) TO THE APPELLANT. II. DENIAL OF EXEMPTION U/S 10(22) OF THE ACT : 1. THE CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT WHEN THERE IS EXCESS APPLICATION AS PER RETURN OF INCOME FILED TH E APPELLANT CANNOT CLAIM EXEMPTION U/S 10(22) OF THE ACT WHEN THE APPLICANT IS ONLY CARRYING ON EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES AS PER THE FINDINGS OF THE A O HERSELF. 2. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN CONCLUDING THAT APPELLANT IS NO T ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION U/S 10(22) OF THE ACT IN THE ABSENCE OF REGISTRATION U/S 12AA AS THE EXEMPTION U /S 10(22) DOES NOT STIPULATE CONDITION OF REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. 3. THE CIT(A) IS NOT CORRECT IN UPHOLDING THE DENIAL O F EXEMPTION U/S 10(22) FOR THIS YEAR BASED ON THE ORD ER PASSED U/S 12AA(1)(B)(II) OF THE ACT BY THE DIRECTO R OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) ORDER DT. 28.6.2002. 4. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN CONCLUDING THAT THE APPELLANT I S NOT ENTITLED EXEMPTION U/S 10(22) BASED ON NON-FILI NG OF APPEAL FOR THE ASST. YEAR 1995-96. 5. THE CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE APPELLANT IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT ORDER IN ITA NO.44/2006 DT. 9.11.2010 WHICH HAS ADMITTED AND NOTICE ISSUED. 6. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DENIAL OF EXEMPTION U/S 10(22) OF THE ACT BASED ON THE ALLEG ED ITA NOS.912 - 9 17/B/14 4 STATEMENT OF SRI PL NANJUNDASWAMY U/S 131 OF THE ACT ON 11.3.1998 THOUGH THE SAID STATEMENT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY RETRACTED BY HIM AS PER THE CIT(A) ORDER IN ITA NO.24 25 26/04-05 DT. 30.5.2005 AT PARA 13(5)(B) AND FURTHER CONFIRMED BY THE HONBLE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL. THE SAID RETRACTED STATEMENT OF SRI PL NANJUNDASWAMY WAS ACCEPTED BY THE AO IN THE REMAND REPORT DT. 28.2.2003 THE CONTENTS OF THE SAID REMAND REPORT WAS REPRODUCED BY THE CIT(A) VIDE ORDER NO.24 25 26/04-05 DT. 30.5.2005 AT PARA 13(5)(B). 7. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT FOLLOWING THE DIRECTION OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT STATED THAT ALL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH PARTIES ARE KEPT OPEN BY DENYING THE COPY OF REASONS RECORDED NOTICES SERVED INSPECTION OF RECORDS ETC. BY STATING THAT THE REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT HAS REACHED FINALITY. THE CIT(A) CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER SELECTIVELY RELYING ON CERTAIN PORTIONS IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WITHOUT REFERENCE TO THE PREVIOUS ORDERS OF THE CIT(A) AND HONBLE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IS NOT CORRECT. 8. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN SUPPRESSING THE PRIMARY FINDING OF THE AO VIDE REMAND REPORT DT. 28.2.2003 IN DENYING THE EXEMPTION U/S 10(22) OF THE ACT. 9. THE CIT(A) FINDING AS PR PARA 18.2 THAT IT IS CLEA R THAT EVEN AS PER THE ORDERS OF HONBLE ITAT THE RECEIPTS IN QUESTION ARE UNACCOUNTED RECEIPTS VIDE ITS ITA NOS.912 - 9 17/B/14 5 ORDER ITA NO.1242 TO 1244/BANG/2005 AND ITA NO.51 TO 53/BANG/2006 ARE NOT CORRECT AND WITHOUT APPRECIATION OF FACTS IN THE ABOVE ORDERS. 10. FOR THESE AND OTHER REASONS THAT MAY BE ADDUCED AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE APPEAL MAY BE ALLOWED AND JUSTICE RENDERED.- 3. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE WE TAKE THE APPEAL FOR ASST. YEAR 1996-97 AS LEAD CASE AND THE RELEVANT FACTS ARE DIS CUSSED HERE UNDER: 4. THIS IS SECOND ROUND OF LITIGATION. IN THE FIRS T ROUND THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 144 R.W.S 147 ON 25 TH FEB 2004 IN RESPECT OF THIS ASSESSMENT YEARS WHILE COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT U/S 144 R.W.S 147 VIDE ORDER DATED 25/2/2004 THE AO DE NIED THE EXEMPTION TO THE ASSESSEE U/S 10(22) AS WELL AS SEC . 11 OF THE INCOME- TAX ACT AND CONSEQUENTLY THE AO MADE THE ADDITION T O THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED TH E ACTION OF THE AO BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO AND ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION BY FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 26.8.2005 IN THE APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE DIT(EXEMPTION) REJECTING THE REGISTRATION U/S 12A O F THE ACT. THE TRIBUNAL GRANTED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE AND DIRECTE D THE ITA NOS.912 - 9 17/B/14 6 DIT(EXEMPTION) TO GRANT REGISTRATION U/S 12A TO THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY THE CIT(A) ALLOWED THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 5. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) THE REVENU E FILED APPEALS BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL ALL THESE ASSESSMENT YEARS WHICH WERE DISMISSED BY THIS TRIBUNAL VIDE RESPECTIVE ORDERS. THE REVENUE CARRIED THE MATTER TO HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH C OURT IN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTE ARISEN FROM THE ORDER OF THE DIT(EXEMP TION) REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A WHICH WAS AL LOWED BY THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER TH E HONBLE HIGH COURT VIDE ORDER DATED 9/11/2010 HAS SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL AND RESTORED THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DIT ( EXEMPTION) REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S 12A. IN THE APPEALS ARISEN FROM ASSESSMENT ORDER THE HONBLE H IGH COURT REMANDED THE MATTER IN RESPECT OF ALL THESE ASSESSM ENT YEARS TO THE RECORD OF THE AO WITH THE DIRECTION TO LOOK INTO TH E RECORD AND EXAMINE THE ENTITLEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE TO CLAIM EX EMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT IN THE LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT REGISTRATION U/S 12A GRANTED BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 26/8/2005 WAS SET ASIDE B Y THE HONBLE HIGH COURT. THE CASE WAS REMITTED BACK TO THE AO F OR REDOING THE WHOLE EXERCISE AND THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW RAISED IN THE ITA NOS.912 - 9 17/B/14 7 REVENUES APPEAL AND CONTENTIONS OF BOTH PARTIES WE RE KEPT OPEN VIDE ORDER DATED 7/12/2010. 6. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOW COMPLETED THE ASSESSME NT IN PURSUANT TO THE DIRECTIONS OF THE HONBLE HIGH COUR T VIDE ORDER DATED 27/3/2012 AND MAINTAINED THE ADDITION AS MADE WHILE PASSING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 144 R.W.S 147 DATED 25/2/2004. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE ACTION OF THE AO BEFORE THE CIT(A) B UT COULD NOT SUCCEED EXCEPT PARTIAL RELIEF FOR THE ASSESSMENT YE AR 1996-97 AND 1997-98 WAS GRANTED. 7. AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A) T HE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THESE APPEALS. THE FIRST GROUND OF THE A SSESSEES APPEAL IS REGARDING THE DENIAL OF OPPORTUNITY OF PROPER HEARI NG AND VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE FOR NOT PROVIDING THE RECORD/MATERIAL SOUGHT BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE AO. 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED AR AS WELL AS LEARNED DR AND CONSIDERED THE RELEVANT MATERIALS ON RECORD. ITA NOS.912 - 9 17/B/14 8 9. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED A GROUND OF VIOLAT ION OF PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE THEREFORE WE FIRST TAKE UP THE ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN GROUND NO.1. THE LEARNED AR OF THE ASS ESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT AFTER THE MATTER WAS REMITTED BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT THE AO ISSUED A NOTICE OF HEARING ON 8/2/201 3 AND FIXED THE CASE FOR HEARING ON 26/2/2013. ON THE SAID DATE THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARED AND SUBMITTED A LETTER FOR SE EKING THE PROCEEDINGS KEPT IN ABSENCE TILL THE DISPOSAL OF TH E SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (SLP) BEFORE THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT. HOWEVER THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED TO 12 TH MAR 2013. THE LEARNED AR HAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT IT WAS BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE AO THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT PROVIDED OPPORTUNITY TO INSPECT THE MATERIA L/RECORD GATHERED DURING THE SURVEY CONDUCTED ON 6/12/2002 WHICH HAS BEEN RELIED UPON BY THE AO WHILE COMPLETING THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT. THUS THE ASSESSEE PURSUED THE MATTER AND REQUESTED FOR OBTAI NING THE COPIES OF THE RELEVANT RECORD OPPORTUNITY TO INSPECT THE REC ORD AND TO OBTAIN THE DOCUMENTS INCLUDING REASONS FOR REOPENING THE ASSE SSMENT U/ S 147 COPY OF SURVEY REPORT PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE U /S 148 ETC. THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE AO . THE LEARNED AR POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE EVEN RESORTED TO THE REMEDY UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT TO GET THE MATERIAL FROM THE AO. BUT THE ASSESSEE ITA NOS.912 - 9 17/B/14 9 WAS NOT PROVIDED THE INFORMATION SOUGHT FOR. THE L EARNED AR HAS REFERRED THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDE R RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT AND THE RESPONSE BY THE AUTHORITY W HEREBY THE MAJORITY OF THE INFORMATION WAS NOT PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED AR HAS REFERRED LETTER DATED 30 TH OCT 2013 WRITTEN TO THE DY. DIRECTOR INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTION) WHEREIN THE INFORMA TION AND DOCUMENTS SOUGHT BY THE ASSESSEE VIDE APPLICATION U NDER RTI DATED 17/10/2013 BUT NOT FURNISHED TO THE ASSESSEE WERE B ROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE DIT(EXEMPTION). THUS THE LEARNED AR HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE INFORMATION SOUGHT BY THE ASSESSEE IS BASI C REQUIREMENT OF THE ASSESSMENT AND GOES TO THE ROOT OF THE MATTER. HE HAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE HONBLE HIGH COURT WHILE REMITTI NG THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE AO DIRECTED THE AO TO REDO THE ENTI RE EXERCISE AND THE CONTENTION OF BOTH THE PARTIES WERE KEPT OPEN. THE AO COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT ON 27/3/2013 WITHOUT PROVIDING THE ASSES SEE OPPORTUNITY TO INSPECT RELEVANT RECORD AND TO HAVE THE COPIES OF THE INFORMATION AND RECORD SOUGHT BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED IN HASTE WITHOUT GIVING SUFFICIENT TIME/OPPORTUNITY. THE ASSESSEE RAISED THIS ISSUE BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND CONTENDED THAT THE AO WAS DUTY BOUND TO SUPPLY THE INFORMATION. HOWEVER THE CIT( A) HAVING POWERS WHICH CO-EXTENSIVE WITH THE AO BUT THE CIT (A) REJECTED THE ITA NOS.912 - 9 17/B/14 10 PLEA RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE INSTEAD OF HAVING ACTE D ON THE REASONABLE REQUEST. THUS THERE IS A VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE BY THE AO AS WELL AS BY THE CIT(A) IN NOT PROVIDING THE NE CESSARY INFORMATION TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED AR HAS TH US PLEADED THAT THE AO MAY NOT BE DIRECTED TO FURNISH THE INFORMATION S OUGHT BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS NECESSARY FOR THE DEFENSE OF THE ASSESSEE AND COMPLETION OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND ACCORD INGLY IT IS PRAYED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED TO THE RECOR D OF THE AO WITH THE DIRECTION TO THE AO TO SUPPLY ALL THE COPIES OF THE DOCUMENTS. 10. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LEARNED DR HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS RECORDED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT ALL THE NECESSARY INFORMATION/DOCUMENT HAD ALREADY BEEN MADE AVAILABL E TO THE ASSESSEE WHO HAS TAKEN THE ISSUE OF REGISTRATION U/ S 12A UP TO THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT. THE RELEVANT DETAILS ARE SU BJECT MATTER OF FINDINGS OF THE DIT(EXEMPTION) IN THE ORDER DATED 2 8/6/2002 WHICH IS RELEVANT IN THIS CASE. FURTHER IN THE SECOND ROUN D OF LITIGATION THE ASSESSEE IS NOT PERMITTED TO RAISE SUCH A PLEA OF S EEKING THE INFORMATION WHICH WAS NOT RAISED IN THE INITIAL ASS ESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. THE AOS JURISDICTION W AS LIMITED TO REDO THE ASSESSMENT AS PER THE DIRECTIONS OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT AND ITA NOS.912 - 9 17/B/14 11 THEREFORE THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE ALLOWED TO RAISE THESE PLEAS OF VIOLATION OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND NOT PROVIDING THE ALLEGED INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTS AT THIS STAGE. HE HAS RELIED UPON TH E ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 11. HE HAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAS ALSO P OINTED OUT THAT IN THE FIRST ROUND OF LITIGATION THE CIT(A) HAS RE CORDED THE FACT THAT THE REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMEN T U/S 147 WAS WERE SUPPLIED TO THE ASSESSEE THEREFORE THE ASSES SEE CANNOT RAISE THIS ISSUE WHEN THE MATTER WAS ALREADY CARRIED TO THE H ONBLE HIGH COURT AND REMITTED BACK TO THE AO. 12. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AS WEL L AS THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. 13. IN THE EARLIER ROUND OF LITIGATION THE CIT(A) GRANTED THE RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS AND ON FURTHER APPEAL BY THE REVENUE THE TRIBUNAL CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IN GRAN TING RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. THE REVENUE FURTHER CARRIED THE MATTER T O THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AGAINST THE ORDERS OF THI S TRIBUNAL AND THE ITA NOS.912 - 9 17/B/14 12 HONBLE HIGH COURT VIDE JUDGMENT DATED 7 TH DEC 2010 REMITTED THE MATTER TO THE RECORD OF THE AO IN PARA 8 TO 10 AS U NDER: THE CIT(A) HAS ALSO RELIED UPON THE ORDER PASSED IN ITA NOS.24 23 AND 26/TRUST/CIT(A)-5/4/05 DATED 30.5.2005 WHICH WAS THE SUBJECT MATTER OF APPEAL BEFORE ITAT IN 1242 1244/BANG/2005 FILED BY THE REVENUE WHICH CAME TO BE DISMISSED AND SAID ORDERS WHICH HAD BEEN CARRIED IN APPEAL TO THIS COU RT BY THE REVENUE IN ITA NO.763 755 AND 751/2007 HAD BEEN ALLOWED BY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE TRIB UNAL REMITTING THE MATTER BACK TO THE AO FOR REDOING THE WHOLE EXERCISE. IN THAT VIEW OF THE MATTER IT WOULD BE JUST AND PROPER FOR THE AO TO LOOK INTO THE RECORDS AND EXAM INE THE ENTITLEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE TO CLAIM EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE INCOME-TAX IN THESE APPEALS ALSO SINCE TH E REGISTRATION U/S 12A GRANTED BY THE TRIBUNAL BY ORD ER DATED 26.8.2005 HAS BEEN SET ASIDE BY US IN ITA NO.44/2006 BY ORDER DATED 9.11.2010. IN THAT VIEW OF THE MATTER APPEAL DESERVES TO BE ALLOWED IN PART BY REMITTING THE MATTER BACK TO THE AO FOR REDOING HE WHOLE EXERCISE. SINCE THE APPEALS ARE BEING ALLOWED ON FACTS AND APPEALS ARE BEING REMITT ED BACK TO THE AO SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW ARE NO T ITA NOS.912 - 9 17/B/14 13 BEING ANSWERED FOR THE PRESENT. ALL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES ARE KEPT OPEN. NO ORDERS AS TO COSTS. 14. THUS IT IS CLEAR FROM THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT THAT THE MATTER WAS REMITTED BACK TO THE RECORD OF THE AO FOR REDOING THE WHOLE EXERCISE IN THE LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEES APPLICATION FOR SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S 12A REJECTED BY THE DIT(EXEMPTION) WAS UPHELD BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT . THE HONBLE HIGH COURT SPECIFICALLY MADE IT CLEAR THAT THE APPEALS WERE BEING ALLOWED ON FACTS AND WERE REMITTED BACK TO TH E AO FOR REDOING THE WHOLE EXERCISE AND THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW AS WELL AS THE CONTENTIONS OF THE PARTIES WERE KEPT OPEN. THEREF ORE ALL THE ISSUE AND LEGAL CONTENTIONS RAISED BY THE PARTIES WERE KE PT OPEN AND CAN BE RAISED IN THIS SECOND ROUND OF LITIGATION. IT IS P ERTINENT TO NOTE THAT THE MATTER WAS REMITTED BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL H IGH COURT ON 7/12/2010 WHEREAS THE AO HAS INITIATED THE PROCEE DINGS OF REASSESSMENT ONLY IN THE MONTH OF FEB 2013. IT AP PEARS THAT BY THE TIME AO ISSUED NOTICE IT WAS A TIME BARRING CASE T HEREFORE THE ASSESSMENT WAS TO BE COMPLETED BEFORE 31/3/2013. THE AO ISSUED A NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE ON 8 TH FEB 2013 AND FIXED THE CASE FOR HEARING ON 26/2/2013. IT IS APPARENT THAT THERE WAS TIME C ONSTRAINT FOR THE AO ITA NOS.912 - 9 17/B/14 14 TO COMPLETE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LIMITATION PERI OD EXPIRES ON 31/3/2013. THE ASSESSEE APPEARED BEFORE THE AO ON 26/2/2013 AND PLEADED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE KEPT IN ABEYANCE TIL L THE DISPOSAL OF SLP. THOUGH THE AO COULD NOT ACCEPT TO THE REQUES T OF THE ASSESSEE FOR KEEPING THE PROCEEDINGS IN ABEYANCE HOWEVER T HE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH THE INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTS W HICH INCLUDES THE REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT THE O PPORTUNITY TO INSPECT THE RECORD TO PROVIDE THE COPY OF SURVEY RE PORT PROVIDING THE PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE U/S 148 COPY OF THE ORDE R OF THE DIT DENIAL OF THE EXEMPTION U/S 10(22) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR S 1996-97 1998- 99 AND ALL OTHER RECORD WHICH WERE GATHERED DURING THE SURVEY CONDUCTED ON 6/2/2002 OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN PROVIDED T O THE ASSESSEE IN ORDER TO AFFORD A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING AND DEFENDING ITS CASE. WE NOTE THAT THE AO HAS DENIED THE INFORMATI ON SOUGHT BY THE ASSESSEE AND FURTHER IT WAS RECORDED BY THE AO THAT IT IS NOT MANDATORY TO PROVIDE THE REASONS FOR REOPENING OF T HE ASSESSMENT U/S 148 IN THE PRESENT CASE. THE AO FURTHER NOTED THAT THE ISSUE OF REOPENING HAS BEEN DEALT WITH BY THE APPELLATE AUTH ORITY DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. THUS IN VIEW OF THE AO THE ASSESSEES REQUEST WAS NOT TENABLE. WE DO NOT AGRE E WITH THE CONTENTION OF THE AO ON THIS POINT BECAUSE THE ASS ESSEE RAISED THIS ITA NOS.912 - 9 17/B/14 15 ISSUE OF VALIDITY OF REOPENING AND NON SUPPLY OF RE ASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT U/S 148 BEFORE THE CIT( A) WHO DECIDED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS IN FAVOUR OF T HE ASSESSEE THEREFORE THERE WAS NO OCCASION FOR THE ASSESSEE TO CARRY THIS ISSUE FURTHER ONCE THE RELIEF WAS GRANTED ON MERITS BY TH E CIT(A). THE REVENUE CHALLENGED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) BEFORE T HE TRIBUNAL AND THE TRIBUNAL CONFIRMED THE FINDING OF THE CIT(A). ON FURTHER APPEAL THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS REMITTED THE MATTER TO THE RECORD OF THE AO WITH THE DIRECTIONS TO REDO THE WHOLE EXERCISE . THUS THERE IS SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN THE FACTS UNDER WHICH THE ASS ESSMENT WAS TO BE COMPLETED IN PURSUANT TO THE DIRECTIONS OF THE HON BLE HIGH COURT. IN THE EARLIER ROUND OF LITIGATION THE ASSESSEE GOT T HE RELIEF BECAUSE THE REGISTRATION SOUGHT U/S 12A WAS GRANTED BY THIS TRI BUNAL AND CONSEQUENTLY THE CIT(A) AS WELL AS THIS TRIBUNAL DE CIDED THE QUANTUM APPEALS IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. 15. IN THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IN PURSUANT TO THE DIRECTIONS OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT THE MATTER WAS TO BE EXAMIN ED BY CONSIDERING THE NEW DEVELOPMENTS AND FACTS THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT HAVING THE BENEFIT OF REGISTRATION U/S 12A. THEREF ORE IN THE CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES THE ASSESSEE GOT THE RIGHT TO CONTES T ITS CASE ON THE ITA NOS.912 - 9 17/B/14 16 BASIS OF THE FACTS AND THE MATERIAL WHICH IS RELIED UPON BY THE AO FOR FRAMING THE ASSESSMENT. THE ASSESSEE GOT LEGITIMAT E RIGHT TO HAVE ACCESS TO THE RECORD WHICH HAS BEEN USED BY THE AO AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. THE DENIAL OF SUCH RECORD WHICH HAS BEEN USED BY THE AO IN FRAMING THE ASSESSMENT WOULD AMOUNT TO DEPRIVING T HE ASSESSEE OF ITS LEGAL RIGHTS AND THEREFORE WILL RESULT IN THE VI OLATION OF PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. AS REGARDS THE REASONS FOR REOPEN ING THE ASSESSMENT THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THIS ISSUE IN THE FIRST ROU ND OF LITIGATION AS WELL AS BEFORE THE AO IN THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IN PURSUANT FURNISHED TO THE DIRECTIONS OF THE HONBLE HIGH COU RT. THOUGH THE AO HAS GIVEN HIS REASONS TO REJECT THE REQUESTS OF SUPPLY OF REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING HOWEVER WHEN THIS ISSUE WA S RAISED BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL THE LEARNED DR HAS CONTENDED THAT T HE REASONS WERE SUPPLIED TO THE ASSESSEE AS PER THE ORDER OF THE CI T(A) IN THE EARLIER ROUND OF LITIGATION. THE TRIBUNAL DIRECTED THE LE ARNED DR TO PRODUCE THE RELEVANT RECORD WHEREBY IT CAN BE SHOWN THAT TH E REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT WERE SUPPLIED/FURNISHED TO THE ASSESSEE. THIS DIRECTION WAS GIVEN TO THE LEARNED DR VIDE OR DERS DATED 22/1/2015 AND THE MATTER WAS FINALLY HEARD ON 17 TH JUL 2015. THE LEARNED DR HAS EXPRESSED INABILITY TO PRODUCE RELEV ANT RECORD DUE TO SHIFTING OF JURISDICTION AND RECORD. THEREFORE NOTH ING HAS BEEN ITA NOS.912 - 9 17/B/14 17 PRODUCED BEFORE US TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS ARGUMENT THA T THE REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING WERE SUPPLIED TO THE ASSESSE E. EVEN OTHERWISE THE ISSUE OF NON SUPPLY OF REASONS FOR REOPENING O F THE ASSESSMENT GOES TO THE ROOT OF THE MATTER AND IN THE ABSENCE O F CLEAR FINDING OF THE FACT AS WELL THE RECORD ABOUT THE SUPPLY OF REASONS TO THE ASSESSEE THE ISSUE REQUIRES A PROPER CONSIDERATION OF RELEVANT R ECORD TO SHOW THAT THE REASONS WERE ALREADY SUPPLIED TO THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE AO IS REQUIRED TO PRODUCE THE RECORD TO SHOW THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS ALREADY SUPPLIED THE REASONS FAILI NG WHICH THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE SUPPLIED THE REASONS FOR REOPENI NG. WE FURTHER NOTE THAT WHEN THE REQUESTS OF THE ASSESSEE TO SUPP LY THE VARIOUS DOCUMENTS AND OTHER INFORMATION WHICH WAS GATHERED BY THE AO DURING THE SURVEY AS WELL AS THE OTHER RELEVANT MAT ERIAL WHICH WAS RELIED UPON BY THE AO WAS NOT ACCEDED TO THE AO AS WELL AS THE CIT(A) THEN THE ASSESSEE RESTORED TO THE REMEDY AV AILABLE UNDER RTI ACT. EVEN IN RESPONSE TO THE APPLICATION MADE BY T HE RTI ACT ONLY A PARTIAL INFORMATION WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE AND S UBSTANTIAL INFORMATION AND THE DOCUMENTS SOUGHT BY THE ASSESSE E WERE NOT FURNISHED. THUS IT IS CLEAR FROM THE RECORD THAT THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED IN HASTE DUE TO THE CONSTRAINT OF TIME B ECAUSE OF INITIATION OF THE PROCEEDINGS BY THE AO AT THE FOG END OF LIMI TATION AND ITA NOS.912 - 9 17/B/14 18 CONSEQUENTLY THE ASSESSEE WAS DEPRIVED OF THE REASO NABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING AND DEFENDING ITS CASE 16. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE WE SET ASIDE THIS MATTER TO THE RECORD OF THE AO WITH THE DIRECTION TO PROVIDE THE INFORMATION TO THE ASSESSEE AS RAISED IN GROUND NO.I(2) CLAUSE (A) TO (D) AND THEN REDO THE ASSESSMENT BY CONSIDERING THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE SUBSEQUENT TO THE SUPPLY OF THE DOCUM ENTS/INFORMATION SOUGHT BY THE ASSESSEE. SINCE THE MATTER IS REMITT ED TO THE RECORD OF THE AO ON THE ISSUE OF PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE WE DO NOT PROPOSE TO GO INTO THE OTHER ISSUE ON THE MERITS OF THE ASS ESSMENT. THE SAME ARE KEPT OPEN. 17. IN THE RESULT THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSE E ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31 JUL 2015. SD/- SD/- (JASON P BOAZ) (VIJAYPAL RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER VMS. BANGALORE DATED : 31/7/2015 ITA NOS.912 - 9 17/B/14 19 COPY TO : 1. THE ASSESSEE 2. THE REVENUE 3.THE CIT CONCERNED. 4.THE CIT(A) CONCERNED. 5.DR 6.GF BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR I TAT BANGALORE.