,  Û `'  

     IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "C" BENCH, MUMBAI

  [^ ] , Û    Û]   ãá,    ¢

          BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND

                SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

               ./I.T.A. No. 1956/Mum/2013
            ( [ [ / Assessment Year :2010-11
Public Health Guard-India / The CIT-III,     Room No. 7,
Trust,Bk No. A-54,             A-Wing, 6 t h Floor, Ashar,
                           Vs.
 R. No. 323,Ground Floor,      I.T. Park Road ,
Nr. Bank of Baroda,            Wagle Industrial Estate,
Ulhasnagar-421 001             Thane-400 604
    . /   . / PAN/GIR No. : AAATP 5020D
     ( /Appellant)        ..       (× / Respondent)
        / Appellant by:                      Shri M. Subramaniam

      ×   /Respondent by:                   Shri Ms. Parminder Kaur


               / Date of Hearing                            :29.01.2015
               /Date of Pronouncement :29.01.2015

                               / O R D E R

PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM:

        This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the
Ld. CIT-III, Thane dt. 29.11.2012 pertaining to assessment year 2010-11.

2.      The sole grievance of the assessee is that the CIT erred in law as
well as on fact in not granting exemption u/s. 80G of the Act.

3.      At the very outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that the
assessee was not given a reasonable opportunity to present its case as no
                                       2                     ITA No. 1956/M/2013







proper notice was served upon the assessee. To substantiate, the assessee
has filed an affidavit before us stating that it did not receive the letter dt.
28.9.2012 requiring the trust to attend on 29.10.2012 and further the trust
received the letter dt. 29.10.2012 requiring the attendance on 31.10.2012
only on 16.11.2012. It is the say of the Ld. Counsel that since no proper
opportunity was given to the assessee, the assessee could not substantiate
its claim for the renewal of exemption u/s.80G of the Act.

4.    Per contra, Ld. Departmental Representative pointed out that the
CIT in his order has clearly mentioned the service of notice and the
opportunities given to the assessee.

5.    Having heard the rival submissions, we have carefully perused the
order of the CIT and the contents of the affidavit filed by the assessee. In
our considered opinion, the assessee must get one more opportunity to
present its case. We, therefore, restore the matter to the file of the CIT-
III, Thane. The CIT is directed to decide the issue afresh after giving
reasonable and fair opportunity of being heard to the assessee.






6.    In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for
statistical purpose.

      Order pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing on 29th
January, 2015

                Sd/-                                       Sd/-
     (JOGINDER SINGH )                            (N.K. BILLAIYA)
Û /JUDICIAL MEMBER                       / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
 Mumbai;  Dated : 29th January, 2015

.../ RJ , Sr. PS
                           3       ITA No. 1956/M/2013




    /Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1.  / The Appellant
2.   × / The Respondent.
3.    () / The CIT(A)-
4.     / CIT
5.    ,   , 
     / DR, ITAT, Mumbai
6.   [  / Guard file.
                                / BY ORDER,
          ×  //True Copy//
                       / 
                    (Dy./Asstt. Registrar)
                    ,  / ITAT, Mumbai