Ex-parte orders rejecting 12A and 80G registration are set aside and remanded for fresh consideration,

By | June 2, 2025
0 Comment

Ex-parte orders rejecting 12A and 80G registration are set aside and remanded for fresh consideration, as the assessee was denied a proper opportunity to be heard due to non-receipt of hearing notices.

Issue:

Whether ex-parte orders passed by the Commissioner (Exemption) rejecting applications for registration under Section 12A and Section 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on grounds of non-compliance, are valid if the assessee genuinely did not receive notices of hearing, thereby denying them a proper and sufficient opportunity to explain their case.

Facts:

  • The assessee-trust applied for registration under both Section 12A (for tax exemption of trust income) and Section 80G (for enabling donors to claim tax deductions for donations made to the trust).
  • The Commissioner (Exemption) passed ex-parte orders rejecting both these applications.
  • The stated reason for rejection was “non-compliance of notices” by the assessee.
  • However, the assessee submitted that no notice of hearing sent by the Commissioner (Exemption) had been received by them.
  • Consequently, the assessee argued that since they were unaware of the notices, no compliance could be made before the Commissioner.

Decision:

The court held in favor of the assessee. It ruled that since the assessee was not given a proper and sufficient opportunity to explain its case, one more opportunity was to be given to the assessee. Thus, the impugned ex-parte orders were set aside, and the matters were restored for fresh consideration by the Commissioner (Exemption). The matters were remanded.

Key Takeaways:

  • Principles of Natural Justice: Audi Alteram Partem: This judgment is a strong affirmation of the fundamental principle of natural justice: “hear the other side” (audi alteram partem). This includes the right to proper notice of proceedings and a reasonable opportunity to present one’s case.
  • Effective Service of Notice: The mere dispatch or uploading of a notice is not always equivalent to its effective service. If the assessee genuinely claims non-receipt and can substantiate it, the onus shifts to the department to prove proper service.
  • Consequences of Ex-parte Orders: An ex-parte order passed without proper notice and an opportunity to be heard is a violation of fundamental rights and is susceptible to being set aside by higher courts.
  • Importance of 12A and 80G Registration: Registration under Section 12A is crucial for a trust to claim exemption on its own income under Section 11/12. Approval under Section 80G is vital for attracting donations, as it allows donors to claim tax deductions. Denying these without due process can severely impact a trust’s ability to operate.
  • Remedy of Remand: When an order is set aside due to a violation of natural justice, the typical remedy is to “remand” the matter. This means the case is sent back to the original authority (Commissioner Exemption in this case) with a direction to re-adjudicate the applications afresh, ensuring that the assessee is given a proper opportunity to present their case.
  • “Proper and Sufficient Opportunity”: This phrase implies that the opportunity must not only be granted but must also be adequate enough for the assessee to effectively participate in the proceedings.
IN THE ITAT LUCKNOW BENCH ‘A’
Sai Seva Sansthan
v.
Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption)
Sudhanshu Srivastava, Judicial Member
and Nikhil Choudhary, Accountant Member
IT Appeal Nos. 750 and 751 (LKW.) of 2024
MAY  22, 2025
Ashish Jaiswal, Adv. for the Appellant. R.K. Agarwal, CIT(DR) for the Respondent.
ORDER
1. These appeals have been preferred by the assessee against separate orders, both dated 24.09.2024, passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) [hereinafter called the ‘Ld. CIT(E)’], Lucknow, rejecting the assessee’s applications for registration under section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’) and for grant of approval under section 80G(5) of the Act.
2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeals:
GROUNDS IN ITA NO.751/LKW/2024:
1.That the appellant in the form of Trust is carrying charitable activities of running Old Age Shelters and Ghaushala u/s 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and has applied for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac) (iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which has been rejected by Id. CIT (Exemption) u/s 12AB(1)(b)(ii)(B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of noncompliance by the appellant.
2.That the appellant was not aware of the correspondence/ notice of hearing sent by the office of Id. CIT (Exemption) because of which unwillingly compliance could not be made before the Id. CIT and request your honour to provide an opportunity to be heard before the Id. CIT (Exemption) in the interest of justice.
3.That the Id. CIT (Exemption) has erred in rejecting the application in absence of any finding on merit on the basis of facts and material available on record.
4.That the appellant craves leave to introduce, modify or withdraw any ground of appeal with your honours kind permission.
GROUNDS IN ITA NO.750/LKW/2024:
1.That the appellant in the form of Trust is carrying charitable activities of running Old Age Shelters and Ghaushala u/s 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and has applied for registration u/s 80G(5) (iv) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which has been rejected by Id. CIT (Exemption) u/s 80G(5)(ii)(b)(B)of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of noncompliance by the appellant.
2.That the appellant was not aware of the correspondence/ notice of hearing sent by the office of Id. CIT(Exemption) because of which unwillingly compliance could not be made before the Id. CIT and request your honour to provide an opportunity to be heard before the Id. CIT(Exemption) in the interest of justice.
3.That the Id. CIT (Exemption) has erred in rejecting the application in absence of any finding on merit on the basis of facts and material available on record.
4.That the appellant craves leave to introduce, modify or withdraw any ground of appeal with your honours kind permission.
3. The Ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee submitted that there is a delay of 20 days each in filing the appeals before the Tribunal. He submitted that the assessee had filed an application for condonation of delay, duly supported by an Affidavit of one Shri Prakash Pal (staff of the Counsel of the assessee), stating therein that the deponent had paid challan for appeal fee on 21.11.2024 and Form No.36 and grounds of appeals were also prepared well in time, but due to inadvertent mistake by the deponent working with the Counsel of the assessee, the appeals memo file got mixed up with other case files and could not be filed within the stipulated time. It was prayed by the Ld. A.R. that the delay caused in filing the appeals was not deliberate and that it was beyond the control of the assessee, which may please be condoned and the appeals be heard on merits.
4. The ld. CIT (D.R.) had no objection to the delay being condoned.
5. In view of the prayer made on behalf of the Assessee, duly supported by Affidavit and no objection by the ld. CIT (D.R.), we condone the delay in filing of the appeals and admit the appeals for hearing.
6. During the course of hearing, the Ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee (Ld. A.R.) submitted before us that the applications of the assessee for registration under section 12A of the Act and grant of approval under section 80G(5) of the Act were rejected by the ld. CIT(E) by passing ex-parte orders. The Ld. A.R. further submitted that notice of hearing sent by the Office of the Ld. CIT(E) had not been received by the assessee and, therefore, no compliance could be made before the ld. CIT(E). The Ld. A.R. prayed that the ex-parte orders passed by the ld. CIT(E) be set aside and the matter be restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for the deciding the same afresh after affording reasonable opportunity to the assessee.
7. Per contra, the Ld. CIT(D.R.) opposed the prayer of the assessee for being given another opportunity.
8. We have heard both the parties and after having gone through the material on record, we note that the ld. CIT (Exemption) had rejected the applications of the assessee for registration under section 12A of the Act and approval under section 80G(5) of the Act by passing orders ex-parte qua the assessee. The submission of the Ld. A.R. was that no notice of hearing sent by the Office of the Ld. CIT(E) had been received by the applicant-assessee and, therefore, no compliance could be made before the ld. CIT(E). Under these facts, we feel that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to explain its case before the ld. CIT (E), as the assessee has not been given proper and sufficient opportunity before disposing of the application for registration under section 12A of the Act and grant of approval under section 80G(5) of the Act by the ld. CIT (E). We, therefore, set aside the orders of the ld. CIT (E) and restore both the matters to his file with the direction to consider the application of the assessee for registration under section 12A of the Act and grant of approval under section 80G(5) of the Act after giving proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to provide the material/clarification as asked for by the ld. CIT (E).
9. In the final result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes.