ITAT emphasizes fair hearing, sets aside CIT(E) rejection under Income Tax Act

The ITAT set aside the CIT(E)'s rejection of the application for registration u/s.12AA of the Income Tax Act, emphasizing the importance of fair hearing and natural justice. The ITAT found that the appellant was not given a proper opportunity to be heard, violating the principle of natural justice. The unsigned order passed by CIT(E) was deemed invalid, and the rejection of the application for approval u/s.80G(5) was also overturned, both appeals being allowed for statistical purposes. The matters were remanded back to the CIT(E) for reconsideration, highlighting the need for fair hearings and natural justice.

---

---

Issues:
- Registration u/s.12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961
- Denial of registration by CIT(E)
- Right to fair hearing and natural justice
- Reconsideration of the matter at the level of CIT(E)
- Unsigned order passed by CIT(Exemptions)
- Application for approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act

Registration u/s.12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961:
The assessee appealed against the rejection of the application for registration u/s.12AA of the Act by CIT(E), Ahmedabad. The CIT(E) rejected the application citing lack of documentary evidence to ascertain the genuineness of the trust activities. The appellant argued that all required documents were submitted but not considered by CIT(E). The appellant also relied on a Gujarat High Court decision emphasizing that registration cannot be denied if there is no doubt about the genuineness of the trust activities. The ITAT found that the principle of natural justice was not followed as the appellant was not given a proper opportunity to be heard. The ITAT set aside the CIT(E)'s order and directed reconsideration, emphasizing the importance of fair hearing and natural justice.

Right to fair hearing and natural justice:
The ITAT stressed the significance of the principle of audi alteram partem (right to be heard) in the legal process. Referring to the Supreme Court's ruling in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, the ITAT highlighted the necessity of a fair hearing before passing any order. The ITAT emphasized that the right to notice, present evidence, cross-examine, and receive reasoned decisions are fundamental aspects of natural justice. The ITAT concluded that the matter required reconsideration at the level of CIT(E) to ensure the appellant's right to a fair hearing was upheld.

Unsigned order passed by CIT(Exemptions):
In a separate appeal, the appellant challenged the unsigned order passed by CIT(E), Ahmedabad. The ITAT found this irregularity and ruled that the entire order was invalid and void ab initio due to being unsigned. Consequently, the appeal on this ground was allowed for statistical purposes.

Application for approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act:
The appellant also contested the rejection of the application for approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act by CIT(E), Ahmedabad. Similar to the previous issue, the rejection was based on the lack of documentary evidence to establish the genuineness of the trust activities. The ITAT applied its decision from the earlier appeal regarding registration u/s.12AA, allowing the appeal for statistical purposes. Both appeals were allowed for statistical purposes, and the matter was remanded back to the CIT(E) for reconsideration while emphasizing the importance of fair hearings and natural justice in the legal process.

---