KRISHAN MOHAN AND SHAKUNTLA DEVI FOUNDATION, DELHI,DELHI vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION) DELHI, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1445/DEL/2025Status: HeardITAT Delhi16 May 2025AY 2021-2022Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT, SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA (Accountant Member)5 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(E) decided the issue without proper appreciation of facts and that the assessee had a reasonable cause for not participating. The matter was restored to the CIT(E) for a fresh decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee's application for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was rejected by the CIT(A) because the assessee failed to provide required details. The assessee claimed to have a reasonable cause for not attending the proceedings before the CIT(E).

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee had a reasonable cause for not attending the proceedings before the CIT(E) and whether the CIT(E) had properly appreciated the facts before rejecting the registration application.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘F’ BENCH,

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sahgal, CA
For Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Hearing: 16.05.2025Pronounced: 16.05.2025

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld.

CIT(E), New Delhi dated 29.03.2024 for A.Y 2021-22.

2.

At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has rejected the application for grant of registration u/s 12A(1)ac(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act, for short] as the assessee failed to file details, information and documents required by the notices to verify the genuineness of the activities of the foundation.

It is the say of the ld. counsel for the assessee that the assessee was prevented by sufficient/reasonable cause for not attending the proceedings before the ld. CIT(E).

3.

Per contra, the ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below.

4.

We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. We find that the ld. CIT(E) has decided the issue without appreciation of facts. We are of the considered view that the assessee has reasonable cause for not participating before the ld. CIT(E).

5.

In view of the above facts and circumstances and in the interest of justice and fair play, we are of the considered view that the matter be restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) to decide the issues afresh after allowing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

6.

The ld. CIT(E) is directed to decide the issues afresh after affording reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

The assessee is also directed to provide necessary information /documents as required by the authorities.

7.

In the result, appeal of assessee in is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in open court on 16.05.2025.

More judgments on Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii)

All 1,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →