VEKATESHPURAM TARAPORE EDUCATIONAL TRUST,TAMIL NADU, INDIA vs. EXEMPTIONS WARD 3 CHENNAI, TAMIL NADU, CHENNAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal, considering the lack of knowledge of the assessee's management and the accountant's oversight, decided to grant one more opportunity. The appeals were remitted back to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a charitable trust, applied for registration under Section 12AB and Section 80G of the Income-tax Act. The CIT(E) rejected the applications for non-furnishing of mandatory documents.
What were the issues?
Whether the rejection of registration under Section 12AB and 80G was justified due to non-furnishing of documents, and if a further opportunity should be granted.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: MS. PADMAVATHY.S & SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI
आदेश / O R D E R
PER PADMAVATHY.S, A.M: These appeals by the assessee are against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) (in short “CIT(E)), Chennai, dated 18.03.2026 denying
ITA No.2427 & 2428/Chny/2026 Vekateshpuram Tarapore Educational Trust :2: the registration u/s. 12AB and registration u/s. 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
The assessee is a public charitable trust established for the advancement of education and community welfare. The primary objective of the assessee includes establishing educational institutions and providing accessible learning opportunities to students from diverse socio-economic backgrounds. The assessee made an application in Form 10AB on 30.09.2025 seeking registration u/s. 12AB of the Act. The CIT(E) called on the assessee to furnish the following documents: i) Trust deed/instrument creating or establishing the institution. ii) Financials and note on activities iii) Copy of approval u/s. 12A/12AA of the Act obtained in the old regime i.e. prior to 01.04.2021
The CIT(E) held that since the assessee did not furnish the above mandatory documents required for examining the objects and genuineness of the activities, the application seeking registration u/s. 12AB of the Act is to be rejected. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the CIT(E).
We heard the parties and perused the material on record. The ld.AR submitted that the assessee is managed by persons who do not have much knowledge about Income tax proceedings and therefore wholly dependent on the accountant who was handling the tax matters. The ld.AR further submitted that the notices were received by the accountant who did not respond properly to the details called and related compliances. The ld.AR, therefore, prayed for one opportunity to submit the details with an undertaking that if given an opportunity the assessee would comply with the
ITA No.2427 & 2428/Chny/2026 Vekateshpuram Tarapore Educational Trust :3: submissions of details and respond to the notices. Considering the over all facts and circumstances of case, in the interest of natural justice, we are inclined to give one more opportunity to the assessee. Accordingly, we remit the appeal back to the CIT(E) with a direction to call for necessary details to decide the issue of registration u/s. 12AB of the Act in accordance with law. The assessee is directed to file all the relevant details as may be called for without seeking unnecessary adjournments.
With regard to the rejection of approval u/s. 80G of the Act by the CIT(E) we notice that the CIT(E) rejected the said application also for the same reason that the assessee did not submit any details. Considering that we have remitted the issue of registration u/s.12AB of the Act back to the CIT(E), we are remitting the issue of approval u/s. 80G of the Act also back to the CIT(E) with similar directions.
In result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 11th day of September, 2026 at Chennai.
Sd/- Sd/- (मनु कुमार िग!र) (पदमावती यस) (Manu Kumar Giri) (Padmavathy.S) �ाियक सद� / Judicial Member लेखा सद� /Accountant Member चे ई/Chennai, िदनांक/Dated: 11th September, 2026. JPV, Sr. P.S EJTADA Digitally signed by EJTADA DURGA NARESH DURGA आदेश की �ितिलिप अ"ेिषत/Copy to: Date: 2026.09.17 NARESH 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 10:29:47 +05'30' 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु$/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड� फाईल/GF
More judgments on Section 12AB
- Desire Foundation, Jaipur vs Income Tax Officer, JaipurITA 1646/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Sheo Narayan Trust, Khajpura vs CIT Exemption, PatnaITA 554/PAT/2026[2025-2026]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2025-2026
- Ss Early Learning Society, Hyderabad vs CIT (Exemption), HyderabadITA 1208/HYD/2025[2026-27]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2026-27
- Shri Brajshiromani Laxmandas Sewa Trust… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(1), Mathura…ITA 592/AGR/2026[2026-2027]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2026-2027
- Shri Brajshiromani Laxmandas Sewa Trust… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(1), Mathura…ITA 591/AGR/2026[2026-2027]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2026-2027
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Manoj Kumar Das vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Superwealth Financial Enterprises Private Limited, Khordha vs. Joint Commissioner Good And Service Tax Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Simanchal Sahoo vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Prafulla Chandra Khatua, Mayurbhanj vs. The State Tax Officer Of CT And GST, MayurbhanjOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sidhivinayak Roadways, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise, Rourkela Commissionerate, RourkelaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026