Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed appeals challenging the CIT(E)'s order rejecting their application for approval/registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) rejected the application because the assessee failed to provide necessary details and evidence to substantiate the genuineness of its activities.
Held
The Tribunal dismissed ITA No.637/Del/2025 as it was not born out of the CIT(E)'s order. For ITA No.638/Del/2025, the matter was restored to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication, directing the assessee to provide necessary evidence to establish the genuineness of its activities. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) was justified in rejecting the registration application for failure to provide details and evidence, and if the assessee should be given another opportunity.
Sections Cited
12A, 12A(1)(ac)(iii), 12AB(1)(b)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘C’: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
O R D E R [ PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM: Both the appeals are filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi [CIT(E), in short] dated 31.12.2024 rejecting the approval/registration sought u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’).
The assessee has filed two separate appeals against the one single order wherein the assesse has challenged the action of the Ld. CIT(E) for rejection of approval/registration u/s 12A of the Act and in the assessee has challenged the action of Ld. CIT(E) for rejecting the application for registration u/s 12AB(1)(b) of the Act.
From the perusal of the order, it is seen that the assessee has filed Form 10B for granting registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) which stood rejected, therefore, the challenging the order u/s 12A is not born out from the order of Ld. CIT(E) and, thus, the same is hereby dismissed.
With regard to arising out of the order of Ld. CIT(E), it is seen that the Ld. CIT(E) has denied the registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) as the assessee has failed to provide the details as sought for time to time and thus, the Ld. CIT(E) was the opinion that the assessee has failed to substantiate the genuineness of its activity.
Before us, the Ld. AR of the assessee submits that the assessee though was not able to file the details before the Ld. CIT(E), however, he requested that assessee may be granted one more opportunities to represent its case before the Ld. CIT(E) to file the documentary evidences as required by Ld. CIT(E).
In reply, the Ld. CIT-DR supported the orders of Ld. CIT(E) and requested for the confirmation of the same.
We have heard the rival submissions and from the perusal of the order of Ld. CIT(E), it is seen that the Ld. CIT(E) on various occasions asked the assessee to file the details of bills and vouchers of the expenses, details of donations received, details of beneficiaries of charitable activities, details of employees to whom salary paid in order to establish the genuineness of its activity being carried out for charitable purposes. However, the assessee has failed to file any such information before the Ld. CIT(E), thus, the CIT(E) has denied the registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act.
Under these facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of natural justice, the matter is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication on merits in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunities to the assessee. The Assesse is also directed to file the necessary evidences before the Ld. CIT(E) in order to establish the genuineness of its activity. With these directions appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, ITA 637/Del/2025 as dismissed and 638/Del/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 13.05.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (MANISH AGARWAL) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 16.05.2025 PK/Ps