GURU GOBINDSINGHJI SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL, NANDED,NANDED vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), PUNE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 602/PUN/2023Status: HeardITAT Pune19 June 20234 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the rejection without considering the reasonable cause for non-compliance requires reconsideration. The matter was remanded back to the CIT(E) for two effective opportunities to comply with the requirements.

What were the facts?

The appellant applied for registration under Section 12AB. The CIT(E) rejected the application after the appellant failed to provide further details regarding its activities, citing ongoing school exams as a reason for non-compliance.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the registration application without considering the reasonable cause for the assessee's failure to provide further details.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 12A(1)(ac)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE “A” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY & SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI

For Appellant: Shri Pratik Sandbhor
Pronounced: 15/06/2023

बनाम / V/s. Commissioner of Income Tax Officer Exemption, Pune. . . . . . . .प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee by : Shri Pratik Sandbhor Revenue by : Shri Keyur Patel सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusive Hearing : 15/06/2023 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 15/06/2023 आदेश / ORDER PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI, AM; The present appeal is assailed against the DIN: ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2022-23/1051716180(1) the order passed u/s 12AB(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [for short “the Act”] of refusal to grant registration by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune [for short “CIT(E)”].

ITAT-Pune Page 1 of 4

Guru Gobindsinghji Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Nanded.

2.

We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties; and subject to the provisions of rule 18 of “ITAT Rules”, perused the material placed on record, and we note that; 2.1 The appellant had e-filed an application u/s 12A(1)(ac) of the Act in Form No 10AB on 29/09/2022 thereby seeking 12A registration under the category of charitable trust / institution. The Ld. CIT(E) in-order to verify the objects, activities and to ascertain fulfilment of conditions for granting registration, was put the appellant to a notice dt. 13/01/2023 which were duly complied by online submission.

2.2 Perusing the Form 10AB in the light of submission, the Ld. CIT(E) put assessee to further notice dt. 17/03/2023 and called upon to cure the discrepancies communicated therein. Upon the failure of the appellant to substantiate the activities engaged into by it, the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application cancelling the provisional registration granted u/s 12AB r.w.s. 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the Act.

ITAT-Pune Page 2 of 4

Guru Gobindsinghji Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Nanded.

3.

Aggrieved thereby, the appellant is in appeal alleging the action of Ld. CIT(E) as in violation of principle of justice on the ground that the failure to adduce the further details in support of activities engaged into was unintentional and attributed towards appellant engagement in the on-going school exams, and thus deserves one more opportunity.

4.

Herein we note that, apparently the preliminary submission made by the assessee alongwith the application u/s 12A(1)(ac) did not productively prove the eligibility and claim of the appellant for grant of approval u/s 12AB of the Act, as a consequence the Ld. CIT(E) called upon the appellant to adduce additional and cogent evidences in support of its claim of having engaged into such activities as per it’s object clause. However during corresponding period the appellant was conducting school exams, which prevented the appellant assessee from carrying out effectual compliance with the direction of the Ld. CIT(E).

ITAT-Pune Page 3 of 4

Guru Gobindsinghji Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Nanded. ITA No.602/PUN/2023

5.

In the aforestated, uncontroverted facts, the rejection without considering the reasonable cause in our considered opinion requires reconsideration.

6.

For the aforestated reason, we without commenting on the merits of the case, deem fit to remand the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for according two effective opportunities to refute the rejection vis-à- vis to comply with the requirements sought.

7.

Resultantly, the appeal of the appellant is ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. In terms of rule 34 of ITAT Rules, the order pronounced in the open court on this Thursday 15th day of June, 2023.

-S/d- -S/d- PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY G. D. PADMAHSHALI JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / PUNE ; ददनाांक / Dated : 19th day of June, 2023. आदेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1.अपीलाथी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT, Pune 4. The Pr. CIT(E), Pune 5. DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune 6. गार्ड फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / By Order, वररष्ठ दनजी सदिव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.

ITAT-Pune Page 4 of 4

More judgments on Section 12AB

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →