KHUCHAMAN VIKAS SAMITI BOMBAY ,MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION) MUMBAI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4831/MUM/2026Status: HeardITAT Mumbai21 July 2026AY 2026-275 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee was not granted a reasonable and effective opportunity to furnish the required documents, violating principles of natural justice. Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a charitable trust, applied for registration under Section 12AB and approval under Section 80G. The CIT(E) rejected both applications citing non-furnishing of requisite details within the stipulated time.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) provided adequate opportunity to the assessee before rejecting the applications for registration and approval. Whether the principles of natural justice were followed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI

Before: SMT. BEENA PILLAI, HON’BLE & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, HON’BLE

For Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jain, CIT DR
Pronounced: 21/07/2026

आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, मुंबई पीठ�, मुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI BENCH: C BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA 4747 & 4831/MUM/2026 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2026-27) KUCHAMAN VIKAS SAMITI CIT (EXEMPTION) MUMBAI BOMBAY ROOM NO.617, MTNL BLDG, 4TH FLOOR JAIHIND BUILDING PEDDAR ROAD Vs. NO 2, MUMBAI-400002, MUMBAI-400026, MAHARASHTRA MAHARASHTRA अपीलाथ� Appellant ��थ� Respondent

Permanent Account Number of AAATK0643D Assessee:

अपीलाथ� �ारा/Appellant represented by: Shri K.K. Doshi, AR ��थ� �ारा/Respondent represented by: Shri Mukesh Jain, CIT DR

सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusion of hearing: 10-Jul-2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of pronouncement: 21/07/2026 आदेश / ORDER PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

The captioned appeals have been preferred by the assessee against separate orders passed by the Ld. CIT(E), Mumbai, whereby the application for registration u/s 12AB of the Income- tax Act, 1961 and the consequential application for approval u/s 80G of the Act came to be rejected. 2. Since common facts and interconnected issues are involved in both the appeals, they were heard together and are being

ITA 4747 & 4881/MUM/2026 KUCHAMAN VIKAS SAMITI BOMBAY disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 3. The brief facts are that the assessee is a public charitable trust established in the year 1978 and has been carrying on charitable activities in accordance with its stated objects. The assessee had filed applications in Form No.10AB seeking registration u/s 12AB and approval u/s 80G of the Act. 4. During the course of proceedings, the Ld. CIT(E) issued a notice dated 11/01/2026 fixing the hearing on 19/01/2026, calling upon the assessee to furnish various details and documents. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application for registration u/s 12AB holding that the requisite details had not been furnished within the stipulated time. Consequent thereto, the application seeking approval u/s 80G was also rejected.

5.

Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us.

6.

The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is an old charitable trust established in the year 1978 and had been granted registration under the provisions of the Act much prior to the amendment introducing the present registration regime. It was submitted that only one notice dated 11/01/2026 was issued fixing the hearing on 19/01/2026, thereby allowing the assessee only a short period to compile and furnish voluminous documents. The Ld. AR submitted that adequate and effective opportunity was not granted before passing the impugned order and that the assessee is in possession of all the documents and details required by the Ld. CIT(E). It was, therefore, prayed that the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to afford one effective opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its claim. 2

ITA 4747 & 4881/MUM/2026 KUCHAMAN VIKAS SAMITI BOMBAY

7.

Per contra, the Ld. DR relied upon the findings recorded in the impugned orders.

8.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is an undisputed fact that only one notice dated 11/01/2026 was issued by the Ld. CIT(E), fixing the hearing on 19/01/2026. Thus, the assessee was afforded only a limited period to furnish the information and documents called for by the Ld. CIT(E). 9. Considering the nature of the enquiry contemplated u/s 12AB of the Act and the volume of documents ordinarily required to establish the objects of the trust and the genuineness of its activities, we are of the considered view that the assessee ought to have been afforded a reasonable and effective opportunity before an adverse order was passed. The principles of natural justice require that an applicant be granted sufficient opportunity to place all relevant material on record before its application is rejected. 10. The assessee has consistently maintained that it is in possession of all the requisite documents and is ready and willing to furnish the same before the Ld. CIT(E). In the interest of substantial justice, we deem it fit to set aside the impugned order passed u/s 12AB and restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. The Ld. CIT(E) shall afford adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee, consider all the documents and evidences that may be furnished, examine the claim of the assessee in accordance with the provisions of the Act, and thereafter pass a speaking order in accordance with law.

ITA 4747 & 4881/MUM/2026 KUCHAMAN VIKAS SAMITI BOMBAY 11. Since the rejection of the application seeking approval u/s 80G is purely consequential to the rejection of the application u/s 12AB, we also set aside the impugned order passed u/s 80G and restore the same to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication consequent upon the decision to be taken in the proceedings u/s 12AB, in accordance with law. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 21 /07/2026

Sd/- Sd/-

BEENA PILLAI GIRISH AGRAWAL JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Mumbai Dated: 21/07/2026 SC. Sr. P.S.

ITA 4747 & 4881/MUM/2026 KUCHAMAN VIKAS SAMITI BOMBAY Copy to:

KUCHAMAN VIKAS SAMITI BOMBAY, 4TH FLOOR JAIHIND BUILDING NO 2, 1 MUMBAI-400002, MAHARASHTRA

CIT (EXEMPTION) MUMBAI, ROOM NO.617, MTNL BLDG, PEDDAR 2 ROAD, MUMBAI-400026, MAHARASHTRA

3 THE PCIT / CIT, 4 THE D.R., ITAT, MUMBAI BENCH 5 GUARD FILE

More judgments on Section 12AB

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →