Tribunal remands case for fresh hearing, emphasizing natural justice principles.

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(E)'s order and remanded the case for a fresh hearing, emphasizing the principles of natural justice. The CIT(E) is directed to provide a proper opportunity for the assessee to be heard and to assess the charitable nature of the activities and the utilization of funds thoroughly. The appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes, and the matter was remanded back to the CIT(E) for reconsideration.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the assessee was given proper and adequate opportunity of being heard by the CIT(E).
2. Whether the assessee's activities qualify as charitable under Section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
3. Whether the CIT(E) correctly assessed the genuineness of the assessee's activities and the utilization of funds.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Opportunity of Being Heard:
The assessee argued that the CIT(E) did not provide a proper and adequate opportunity of being heard. The CIT(E) issued a notice on 02.09.2017 with 23 queries, and the assessee filed a part reply. The next hearing was scheduled for 18.10.2017, but the assessee did not appear, nor did they file for adjournment. The CIT(E) dismissed the application on the same date without granting further opportunity. The Tribunal noted this and emphasized the principles of natural justice, deciding to restore the matter to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration.

2. Charitable Nature of Activities:
The CIT(E) rejected the application on the grounds that the assessee was not solely existing for educational purposes but was running an educational institution on commercial lines. The CIT(E) observed that the assessee charged substantial fees and did not invest the funds towards charitable objectives. The Tribunal, however, noted that the assessee is registered under Section 12AA, indicating its engagement in educational activities. The assessee argued that the fees charged were reasonable and that all surplus funds were reinvested in educational activities. The Tribunal decided to remit the case back to the CIT(E) for a detailed examination of these claims.

3. Genuineness of Activities and Utilization of Funds:
The CIT(E) found that the assessee claimed exaggerated and mostly bogus expenses, failed to produce books of accounts and vouchers, and did not provide salary details. The CIT(E) also noted significant spending on repairs and maintenance, indicating commercial rather than charitable activities. The assessee contended that all records and vouchers were available for verification and that the expenses were legitimate. The Tribunal directed the CIT(E) to verify these claims afresh, ensuring that the assessee provides all necessary documentation and evidence.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal set aside the order dated 18.10.2017 by the CIT(E) and restored the matter for de novo consideration. The CIT(E) is instructed to provide a proper and adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee and to pass a reasoned and speaking order based on the merits of the case. The Tribunal emphasized the principles of natural justice and the need for a thorough examination of the assessee's activities and utilization of funds.

Order:
The appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 319/All/2017 is allowed for statistical purposes, and the matter is remanded back to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration.

---