"Missed Email" Costs Trust Registration, But ITAT Steps In to Ensure Fair Hearing [Read Order]
The counsel pleaded for one more opportunity, stating the trust was ready to submit all required documents and had a strong case on merit.
Missed Email - Trust Registration - ITAT - Fair Hearing - Taxscan
Missed Email - Trust Registration - ITAT - Fair Hearing - Taxscan
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Surat has come to the aid of a trust whose application for registration was rejected after its managing trustee missed critical emails from the tax department. The tribunal set aside the denial, emphasizing that the principles of natural justice must be upheld.
Shah Manilal Motilal Khadayta Chhatralay & Bhuvan Mandal Gurjar Faliya, a trust based in Surat. The Commissioner of Income-Tax (Exemption) in Ahmedabad had rejected the trust’s application for registration under Section 12A of the Income-Tax Act. The rejection was issued ex-parte because the trust failed to respond to two notices that were sent via email, which the managing trustee had not seen as he did not check the ITBA portal or his email regularly.
The trust’s counsel argued before the ITAT that there was no intentional delay or avoidance. The fact that the application had been dismissed was only discovered in the first week of October 2024 when the trust’s authorized representative checked the portal, leading to an appeal filed on October 18th. The counsel pleaded for one more opportunity, stating the trust was ready to submit all required documents and had a strong case on merit.
The ITAT bench acknowledged the 52-day delay in filing the appeal but condoned it, noting it was not intentional. On the core issue, the tribunal observed that the CIT(E) had decided the matter without a hearing due to non-compliance. The bench firmly stated that it is a settled legal principle that the principles of natural justice require an affected party to be granted a sufficient opportunity to be heard.
Consequently, the ITAT set aside the order of the CIT(E) and remanded the matter back to the commissioner. The CIT(E) has been directed to pass a fresh order in accordance with the law after granting the trust a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The tribunal also directed the trust to be more vigilant and to furnish all required details without seeking unnecessary adjournments.
In conclusion, the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes by the bench comprising Judicial Member Shri Pawan Singh and Accountant Member Shri Bijayananda Pruseth.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
