Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a Trust, applied for regular registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) and approval under Section 80G(5)(iii). The CIT(E) rejected the applications, citing discrepancies and non-filing of evidence. The assessee claimed they did not receive adequate opportunity and documents were lost due to a technical glitch.
Held
The Tribunal held that the CIT(E) rejected the application without giving adequate opportunity and by observing discrepancies. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was restored to the CIT(E) for fresh decision.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) rejected the application without granting adequate opportunity to the assessee to submit documents and evidence.
Sections Cited
80G(5)(iii), 12A(1)(ac)(iii), 12A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA & SHRI VIMAL KUMAR
PER VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
The appeals filed by appellant/assessee are against the separate orders dated 27.12.2024 of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld. CIT(E)’] rejecting applications in Form 10A for grant of regular approval under Section 80G(5)(iii) and registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Brief facts of the case are that applicant-assessee is a Trust incorporated on 10.08.2023. The applicant has obtained provisional registration vide CPC Order No.AABTY0015EE2023101 issued for the period from assessment year 2024-25 to 2026-27 under item-(A) sub clause (vi) of clause (ac) of the sub-section (1) of section 12A of the Act. Applicant Trust filed applications on 29.06.2024 in Form 10AB for regular registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act. Main objects of the applicant-trust as per Form AB are to provide relief of the poor, education, medical relief etc. During financial year 2023- 24, an amount of Rs.20,21,924/- was recorded as a donation received. However, neither confirmation from the donors nor Form 10BE issued to donors has been submitted by the applicant/assessee. Questionnaire in this regard was issued on July 05, 2024, requesting the applicant to provide additional details, documents and clarifications to support the registration claim. Further opportunities to the applicant/assessee were provided through notices but the applicant responded on 16.10.2024 and submitted part reply. Ld. CIT(E) through orders dated 27.12.2024 rejected both the applications.
Being aggrieved, appellant/applicant filed present appeal.
Learned Authorised Representative for the appellant/applicant submitted that Ld. CIT(E) failed to give adequate opportunity of being to the applicant to submit documents. The documents were submitted through online process. Due to technical glitch, the mail was parked in the spam folder.
Learned Departmental Representative for the Department of Revenue submitted that applicant had failed to file detailed information required by the notices in support of genuineness of the activities.
From examination of record in light of aforesaid rival contentions, it is crystal clear that learned CIT(E) rejected application by observing discrepancies/non-filing of evidence/submissions on charitable activities as per objects in the trust deed in violation of principles off natural justice.
In view of above material facts, in the interest of substantial justice, impugned order dated 27.12.2024 of Learned CIT(E) is set aside. The matter is restored to the file of the Learned CIT(E) for fresh decision in accordance with law.
In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.