NETRA PRADIP RURAL EYE TRUST,HOOGHLY vs. CIT(E), KOL, KOLKATA

The assessee is aggrieved against the action of the CIT(Exemption) in rejecting the application of the assessee for final registration as a charitable institution u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).

The ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee- trust is a charitable institution. It was registered as a charitable institution u/s 12A since 31.03.2012 as per the earlier unamended Assessment year: 2023-24 Netra Pradip Rural Eye Trust provision of section 12A of the Act. However, as per the amended provision of section 12A read with newly inserted section 12AB of the Act, the assessee applied for fresh registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(i) of the Act and was granted provisional registration. The assessee thereafter applied for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act. However, the ld. CIT(Exemption) has dismissed the application of the assessee ex parte of the assessee without providing opportunity to the assessee to present its case. The ld. counsel, in this respect, has submitted that the assessee- trust has been enjoying the registration as a charitable institution since 2013 and has never violated any conditions or statutory provisions. That all the documents necessary for consideration were already attached with the online application form, however, the ld. CIT(Exemption), even without examining the application form along with records, dismissed the application of the assessee which was against the principles of natural justice. He has submitted that no notice of hearing was given to the assessee/appellant in this respect. That the ld. CIT(Exemption) allegedly issued the notice of hearing through email, which did not come to the notice of the assessee. That even otherwise, the ld. CIT(Exemption) before rejecting the application should have gone through the record and should have pointed out reasons for rejection of the application.

The ld. DR, on the other hand, has submitted that since the assessee did not furnish the required details as called for by the ld. CIT(Exemption), therefore, the ld. CIT(Exemption) has rightly rejected the application of the assessee.

We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the record. Before proceeding further, it is pertinent to mention here that this Tribunal is receiving many appeals from the different assessees on the