SHREE RAMKRISHNA SEVA TRUST,MALAD vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a charitable trust & registered under Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 with registration number E 12825/Thane dated 29.06.1990. The Trust is engaged in charitable activities. The assessee filed an application in Form No. 10AB under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act on 29.09.2025 seeking renewal of its registration under section 12AB of the Act. During the course of processing of the aforesaid application, the Ld. CIT(E) issued a notice dated 18.01.2026 requiring the assessee to furnish certain documents and details in support of its application. The Ld. CIT(E), in the impugned order, has stated that the application was considered incomplete and that all documents required to accompany the application under Rule 17A(2) of the Income Tax Rules, 1963 (in short, ‘Rules’) had not been furnished. The assessee submits that the application was made bona fide for renewal of its registration under section 12AB and that the assessee was entitled to consideration of its application in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The rejection, however, has been made primarily on the ground of alleged non compliance with the notice issued by the learned CIT(E). The assessee contended that the impugned order does not record any adverse finding regarding the charitable nature or objects of the assessee-trust or any finding that the activities of the Trust were not genuine. The Ld. CIT(E), while passing the impugned order observed that registration under section 12AB is to be granted after being satisfied about the objects of the trust or institution, the genuineness of its activities and compliance with other applicable laws. However, according to the Ld. CIT(E), in the absence of the requisite compliance by the assessee, it was not possible to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion on these parameters. Consequently, the application for renewal of registration under section 12AB was rejected. The Ld. CIT(E) ultimately rejected the application on the ground of non compliance with the terms of the notice issued to the assessee. Being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(E) filed in appeal before the ITAT and seeks appropriate relief in accordance with law.

The Ld. AR argued and filed a paper book comprising pages 1 to 43 which has been placed on record. The Ld. AR conceded the fact that the assessee failed to comply the notice issued by the Ld. CIT(E). The Ld. AR prayed to restore the application before the Ld. CIT(A) for one more opportunity.

The DR argued & stands in favour of the order of the Ld. CIT(E). But he had not made any strong objection against the submission of the Ld. AR.

We have heard the rival submissions and carefully considered the material available on record. It is evident that the impugned order was passed ex parte as the assessee did not effectively participate in the proceeding before the Ld. CIT(E). Before us, the assessee has produced various documents, including registration certificate under Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950, Registration Certificate u/s 12A, Registration in Form No.10AC & Audited Balance Sheet from AY 2023-24 to AY 2025-26 which are carrying evidence for genuineness & activities of assessee-trust. In the interest of substantial justice and having regard to the principles of natural justice, we are of the considered view that the assessee deserves one more effective opportunity to substantiate its claim before the Ld. CIT(E). Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(E) and restore the matter to his file for de novo adjudication in accordance with law after affording the assessee a reasonable and effective opportunity of being heard and after considering all the evidences and submissions that may be placed on record. The assessee shall extend full cooperation and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. We clarify that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case, and all issues are left open for fresh adjudication by the Ld. CIT(E). Accordingly, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.5118/Mum/2026 is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 18TH day of August 2026 Sd/- Sd/- (ARUN KHODPIA) (ANIKESH BANERJEE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai,िदनांक/Dated: 18/08/2026 SAUMYA Sr.PS Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपीलाथ�/The Appellant , 2. �ितवादी/ The Respondent. 3. आयकरआयु� CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., मुंबई/DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गाड�फाइल/Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Asstt. Registrar), ITAT, MUMBA