ASHARFI LAL SEWA TRUST,BAREILLY vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee was not provided with a sufficient opportunity of being heard as the notice was not properly served. Therefore, the order of the CIT (Exemption) was set aside to provide one more opportunity to the assessee.
What were the facts?
The assessee trust applied for registration under Section 12AA of the IT Act. The CIT (Exemption) rejected the application ex-parte because the notice sent to the assessee was returned unserved due to the recipient's death, and no one appeared on behalf of the assessee.
What were the issues?
Whether the rejection of the registration application was justified without providing a proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW
Before: SHRI A.D JAIN & SHRI T.S. KAPOOR
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 22/11/2017 passed by ld. CIT (Exemption) rejecting the application for registration u/s 12AA of the I.T. Act.
The facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee trust applied for registration u/s 12A(a) of the Act with CIT (Exemption) vide application dated 16/06/2017. The ld. CIT (Exemption) issued a letter dated 23/10/2017 to the assessee calling for specific queries regarding the application for registration u/s 12A for compliance on 22/11/2017 which has been returned by the postal department with the comments “praaptkarta ki mirtyu ho gai hai attah wapas”. When nobody appeared nor filed written submissions on behalf of the assessee due to non receipt of notice, the CIT (Exemptions) passed the ex-parte order and rejected the application of the assessee for registration u/s 12A(A) of the Act on the ground that the assessee trust has not been able to produce the books of account, bank statement and vouchers in respect of expenses claimed by the assessee for verification of objects and activities of the trust.
We have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. We noted that ld. CIT(Exemption) has rejected the application of the assessee for registration u/s 12AA of the I.T. Act for failure of the assessee to provide documents and books of account on the fixed date. We further find that one notice was issued to the assessee which was not even served upon the assessee as it had returned back unserved. Therefore, in these circumstances, we feel that sufficient opportunity of being heard was not provided to the assessee. Therefore, in these facts and circumstances, we feel that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to explain its case before the ld. CIT (Exemption) as the assessee has not been given proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard. We, therefore, in the interest of justice, set aside the order of the ld. CIT (Exemption) and restore the matter to his file with the direction to consider the application of the assessee for registration u/s 12A, after giving proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee and to decide it afresh expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months from the date of passing of this order. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the proceedings and should provide the material / clarifications as asked for by the ld. CIT (Exemption) at the earliest.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.
(Order pronounced in the open court on 06/02/2020)
More judgments on Section 12AA
- Yashaswi Academy for Skills, Pune vs PCIT (Central), PuneITA 2448/PUN/2026[NA]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026
- Yashaswi Academy for Skills, Pune vs PCIT (Central), PuneITA 2447/PUN/2026[NA]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026
- Sri Jawahar Education Trust, Chamarajanagar vs The Income Tax Officer Ward 1…ITA 1735/BANG/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed5 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Punjab Urban Planning and Development… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(1), MohaliITA 636/CHANDI/2024[2021-22]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Punjab Urban Planning and Development… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle…ITA 635/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sh Umang Uniyal vs. Commissioner Department Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 16 Oct 2026
- Paresh Textiles Prop Paresh Gudhka vs. Superintendent Range Iv Div VBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Palladium Constructions PVT LTD. vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central TaxKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vk Construction vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IiMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Sri Bhuvaneshwari And Co vs. The Deputy Commissioner (St)Madras · 15 Oct 2026