FATIKA NAZRUL SUKANTA EDUCATIONAL TRAINING CENTER,BANKURA vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 967/KOL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 November 20235 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(Exemption) misconstrued the applications, which were for regular registration and not provisional. The CIT should have adjudicated the applications on merit.

What were the facts?

Two educational and social welfare trusts applied for registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(Exemption) rejected their applications, considering them premature as they already held provisional registration.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Exemption) erred in rejecting applications for registration under Section 12AB as premature when the assessees were seeking regular registration and not provisional.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(KZ) & Shri Rajesh KumarShri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, appeared on behalf of the Revenue

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 967/KOL/2023
I.T.A. No. 963/KOL/2023

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

Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The present two appeals are directed at the instance of assessees against the orders of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Kolkata both dated 11.07.2023 passed on the respective appeals of the appellants.

2.

The grievance of the assessees is that the ld. CIT (Exemption) failed to grant registration under section 12AB, sub- section (1), clause (b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act. The Registry has pointed out that is time-barred by 2 days and ITA No. 967/KOL/2023 is time-barred by 3 days. On perusal of the record, we are of the view that such delay might have occurred on account of calculation error. Considering the smallness of the delay, we condone it and proceed to decide the appeals on merit.

3.

In response to the notice of hearing, no one has come present on behalf of the assessees. With the assistance of ld.

1.

ITA No. 967/KOL/2023 Fatika Nazrul Sukanta Educational Training Center & Bara-Urma Samaj Kalyan Samity CIT(DR), we have gone through the record carefully. For the facility of reference, we reproduce the relevant part of the impugned order passed in ITA No. 963/KOL/2023, which reads as under:-

“The assessee has filed an application for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in Form No. 10AB. This application was found to be prima-facie non- maintainable and accordingly vide letter dated 14.06.2023, certain clarifications were sought from the assessee. The application filed by the assessee is premature as the earlier order in Form 10AC is still valid till A. Y. 2026- 2027. Accordingly the application filed by the assessee is treated as non- maintainable and for statistical purpose the application filed by the assessee is treated as ‘rejected’. However, no adverse inference is drawn against the assessee. MANISH KANOJIA CIT (EXMPTION), KOLKATA”

4.

Verbatim same order is passed in except variation in the date of the letter i.e. 15th June, 2023 instead of 14th June, 2023 mentioned in the order reproduced by us. Therefore, we do not deem it necessary to reproduce the relevant part of the impugned order in ITA No. 967/KOL/2023.

5.

A perusal of the above orders would reveal that ld. CIT(Exemption) did not adjudicate the applications on merit. He simply treated the applications as infructuous on the ground that the assessees are already enjoying registration. It is pertinent to ITA No. 967/KOL/2023 Fatika Nazrul Sukanta Educational Training Center & Bara-Urma Samaj Kalyan Samity mention that clause (c) of section 12AB, sub-section (1) provides for grant of provisional registration for a period of three years from the assessment year from which the registration is sought. The assessees are having provisional registration but they have applied grant of registration under section 12AB(1), clause (b) and nothing else. Ld. Commissioner was required to call for the documents and information satisfies himself and then grants the registration, which is valid for five years. The application was meant for grant of registration and not for provisional. Therefore, ld. CIT has misconstrued the application itself and erroneously dismissed them by treating premature in nature. The impugned orders are set aside and the issues are relegated to the ld. CIT (Exemption) for fresh adjudication.

6.

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 30/11/2023. Sd/- Sd/- (Rajesh Kumar) (Rajpal Yadav) Accountant Member Vice-President (KZ) Kolkata, the 30th day of November, 2023 Copies to :(1) Fatika Nazrul Sukanta Educational Training Center, At Fatika Rol, P.S. Indas, Bankura-722205, West Bengal (2) Bara-Urma Samaj Kalyan Samity,

More judgments on Section 12AB

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →