KIRITSHREE FOUNDATION,MAHARASHTRA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI, MAHARASHTRA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2540/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 November 2023AY 2023-243 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(Exemptions)'s orders, stating that the assessee should not suffer due to the limitation period. The case was restored to the CIT(Exemptions) to provide the assessee with another opportunity to furnish details.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed applications for registration under section 12AB and approval under section 80G. The CIT(Exemptions) rejected these applications due to incomplete documentation and the impending expiry of the limitation period.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of applications for registration and approval solely based on the expiry of the limitation period, despite the assessee's response to notices, is justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai “E” Bench, Mumbai.

Before: Justice C.V. Bhadang & Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM)

For Appellant: Shri Jatin Dalal
For Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das
Hearing: 13.11.2023Pronounced: 13.11.2023

Heard together (2 matters)

I.T.A. No. 2539/Mum/2023
I.T.A. No. 2540/Mum/2023

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Per B.R.Baskaran (AM) :-

1.

Both the appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders passed by the learned CIT(Exemption), Mumbai rejecting the applications filed by the assessee seeking registration under section 12AB of the Act and approval under section 80G of the Act.

2.

We heard the parties and perused the record. We noticed that the assessee had filed two applications in Form No. 10AB seeking registration under section 12AB and approval under section 80G of the Act. On examination of the applications, learned CIT(Exemption) took the view that these applications are not complete and all the documents are required to be furnished were not furnished. Accordingly learned CIT(Exemption), vide his letter dated 18.4.2023, asked the assessee to furnish all the details. The assessee responded to the above said notice and filed its submission on 28.4.2023. Still not satisfied with the documents furnished, learned CIT(Exemption) issued another notice dated 21.5.2023 asking the assessee to furnish further details to ascertain the genuineness of the activities carried on by the assessee. The assessee responded to the second notice also by making its submissions dated 24.5.2023. Still, the learned CIT(Exemption) took the view that the assessee has not furnished complete details. Since the limitation period for granting the registration/approval was ending on 31.5.2023, learned CIT(Exemption) rejected both the applications filed by the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed these appeals before the Tribunal.

3.

Having heard the rival submissions, we notice that the Ld CIT(E) was constrained to reject the applications of the assessee mainly for the reason that the limitation period for processing the applications is about to expire. We notice that the assessee has responded to the notices issued by Ld CIT(E) and it is not the case that the assessee was lethargic or non- responsive. Under these set of facts, we are of the view that the assessee should not be made to suffer on the reasoning that the limitation period for processing the applications of the assessee is about to expire. Accordingly, we are of the view that, in the interest of natural justice, the assessee should be provided with one more opportunity to furnish relevant details to the satisfaction of learned CIT(Exemption).

4.

Accordingly, we set aside both the orders passed by learned CIT(Exemption) and restore all the issues to his file with the direction to allow proper opportunity to the assessee to furnish details called for and accordingly process the applications filed by the assessee seeking registration under section 12AB and approval under section 80G of the Act in accordance with law.

5.

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 13.11.2023

More judgments on Section 12AB

All 5,972 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →