JAI SHRI BABA RAMDEV GAU SEWA SAMITI ARNIYALA,ARNIYALA vs. CIT EXEMPTION JAIPUR, JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 98/JODH/2025Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur07 August 2026AY 2022-20233 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and restored the matter to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. This was based on the assessee obtaining the Rajasthan Public Trust Act registration and the previous compliance not being properly considered.

What were the facts?

The assessee's application for registration under Section 12AA was rejected by the CIT(E) for not being registered under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, incomplete Form 10AB, and non-genuineness of activities. The assessee later obtained the required registration and argued that their compliance was not considered.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of registration under Section 12AA was justified given the subsequent registration under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act and the alleged non-consideration of assessee's compliance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Bhagsinghka, CA (Virtual)
For Respondent: Ms. Shivani Bansal, CIT-DR (Physical)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 98/Jodh/2025 (Assessment Year – 2022-23) Shri Baba Ramdev Gau Sewa CIT (Exemption) Samiti Arniyala Jaipur Arniyala Mertacity, Mertacity Rajasthan-341510 PAN No. AAIAJ 7018 C Assessee by Shri Rajesh Bhagsinghka, CA (Virtual) Revenue by Ms. Shivani Bansal, CIT-DR (Physical) Date of Hearing 04 / 08 / 2026. Date of Pronouncement 07 / 08 / 2026. ORDER PER: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, V.P.: This is an appeal by the assessee against order dated 05.12.2024 of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax Exemption, Jaipur for rejecting assessee’s application seeking registration u/s 12AA of the Income Tax Act.

2.

There is a delay of six days in filing the appeal. After considering the reason for delay, we are of the view that the delay in filing the appeal was due to reasonable cause. Hence, we are inclined to condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication.

2 ITA No. 98/Jodh/2025 Asst. Year: 2022-23 3. We have heard the parties and perused the materials on record. On reading of the impugned order of Ld. CIT(E), it is noticed that the application seeking registration was rejected on the following grounds:

 Not registered under Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959.  Incomplete Form 10AB  Non-genuineness of activities and non-compliance

4.

In so far as the first ground is concerned, at the time of hearing, Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee has submitted that after the order was passed by Ld. CIT(E), the assessee has received the registration under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959. A copy of the registration certificate has been placed on record. In so far as the allegation of incomplete Form 10AB and non-compliance, Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that though the assessee furnished its compliance, however, it was not considered by the Ld. CIT(E). Thus, he requested for restoration of the matter to the Ld. CIT(E).

5.

Ld. DR has no objection.

6.

After duly considering the submissions of the parties, we are of the view that the matter requires to be restored back to the Ld. CIT(E) for de novo adjudication, keeping in view the fact that the assessee has received registration

3 ITA No. 98/Jodh/2025 Asst. Year: 2022-23 under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 and the compliance made was not properly considered by Ld. CIT(E). Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order of Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to consider assessee’s application afresh after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

7.

In result, appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 07/08/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR) (SAKTIJIT DEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT Dated : 07/08/2026. Nimisha, Sr. PS True Copy

Copies to : (1) The appellant. (2) The respondent. (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File BY ORDER,

More judgments on Section 12AA

All 4,243 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →