SHRUTI SANDHAAN FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7894/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 August 2026AY 2027-284 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the Assessee's reasons for non-compliance to be bona fide and plausible. Therefore, it decided to grant one more opportunity to the Assessee to present its case before the Commissioner.

What were the facts?

The Assessee applied for renewal of registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act. The Commissioner rejected the application due to the Assessee's failure to file submissions and documents despite multiple opportunities. The Assessee attributed this non-compliance to inadvertent oversight and lack of a permanent accountant.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of the renewal application for registration under Section 12AB was justified solely on procedural grounds due to inadvertent non-compliance, and if a further opportunity should be granted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI RAKESH KUMAR LODHA

For Appellant: Shri Shekhar Gupta, Ld. A.R
For Respondent: Shri Basavaraj Hiremath
Hearing: 11.08.2026Pronounced: 11.08.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER And SHRI RAKESH KUMAR LODHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.7894/MUM/2026 Assessment Year: 2027-2028 Shruti Sandhaan CIT (EXEMPTIONS) Foundation, CST No. 296A/296A/2, SUR Room No.601, Cumballa Hill Bhandup Sonarpur Lane, LBS Vs. MTNL TE Building, Peddar Marg, Bhandup West, Road, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai,Maharashtra - Mumbai, Maharashtra - 400078 400026 PAN- ABLCS 2467 E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by :Shri Shekhar Gupta, Ld. A.R Revenue Represented by :Shri Basavaraj Hiremath, Ld. CIT (D.R.)

Date of Hearing : 11.08.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 11.08.2026

O R D E R PER : Shri Rakesh Kumar Lodha, Accountant Member: This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 22.06.2026, impugned herein, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of

ITA NO 7894-M-2026 SHRUTI SANDHAAN FOUNDATION

Income Tax (Exemptions) (in short ‘Ld. Commissioner’) u/s 12AB(I)(B)(II) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2027-28.

2.

We observe from the impugned order that though the ld. Commissioner afforded two opportunities to the Assessee, however, the Assessee failed to file the relevant submission and documents and therefore, the ld. Commissioner was constrained to reject the application for renewal of registration u/s. 12A of the Act, filed by the Assessee on 12.11.2025.

3.

The Assessee before us, has filed duly sworn affidavit to demonstrate the cause for non-appearance before the ld. Commissioner and/or non- compliance to the notice issued, the contents of the affidavit are read as under:-

“1. That I am a Director of Shruti Sandhaan Foundation and I am competent to make this affidavit. 2. That the company is registered u/s. 8 of the Companies Act, 2013 on 14-07-2023. The objects of the Foundation are „advancement of any other objects of general public Utility‟. The Foundation is a non-profit company. 3. That the Foundation was granted provisional approval u/s. 12AB and the approval was valid up to Assessment Year 2026-27. The Foundation applied for renewal of registration u/s. 12AB on 12-11-2025. 4. That Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mumbai had issued a questionnaire on 15-05-2026 asking for details and a subsequent reminder on 05-06-2026. I am actively involved in the working of the Foundation and since the Foundation was recently incorporated, I did not have a permanent accountant to look after the affairs of the Foundation and hence inadvertently the notices dated 15-05-2026 and 05-06-2026 could not be downloaded. Thus, due to failure to comply with the notices, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) rejected the application seeking renewal of registration vide order dated 22-06-2026. Further, sometime in the first week of July, 2026 CBDT came out with a notification for condoning the delay in filing Form 10AB for renewal of registration. Thereafter, I checked the income tax portal and saw the notices and the order rejecting the renewal of registration. 5. That I submit that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) had rejected the application merely on account of procedural non-compliance without finding any specific defect in the objects of the Foundation or recorded any adverse finding regarding the genuineness of the charitable activities.

ITA NO 7894-M-2026 SHRUTI SANDHAAN FOUNDATION

6.

That I request your honour to give one more opportunity to furnish the requisite documents before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) and that I will cooperate with all the proceedings. 7. That whatever is stated in para 1 to 6 are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.”

4.

Considering the contents of the affidavit as bona-fide and the reasons stated by the Assessee as plausible, we deem it appropriate to afford one more opportunity to the Assessee to substantiate its claim before the ld. Commissioner. Thus, the case is remanded to the file of the ld. Commissioner for decision afresh, however subject to nominal cost of Rs.11,000/-, just to activate the Assessee as active litigant in pursuing its appeal or its proceedings before the authority. We clarify that in case of subsequent default, the Assessee shall not be entitled for any leniency.

5.

Thus, the appeal is allowed by remanding the case to the file of the ld. Commissioner for decision afresh.

6.

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 11.08.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY) (RAKESH KUMAR LODHA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Sharath Kumar Private Secretary.

ITA NO 7894-M-2026 SHRUTI SANDHAAN FOUNDATION

Copy to: The Appellant The Respondent The CIT, Concerned, Mumbai The DR Concerned Bench

//True Copy// By Order Dy/Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai.

More judgments on Section 12AB

All 5,972 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →