THE INDIAN SOCIETY OF ADVERTISERS,MUMBAI vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5143/MUM/2026Status: HeardITAT Mumbai21 July 2026AY 2027-285 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(E)'s order did not adequately address the assessee's claim of having submitted the required documents. The matter was restored to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee applied for renewal of registration under Section 12AB. The CIT(E) rejected the application, stating non-compliance with notices and incomplete submissions. The assessee contended that all required documents were furnished.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of the registration renewal application was justified due to alleged non-compliance, and if the assessee's submissions were properly considered by the CIT(E).

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 BENCHES, MUMBAI

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

For Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jain, AR
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 5143/MUM/2026 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2027-28) THE INDIAN SOCIETY OF THE COMMISSIONER OF ADVERTISERS INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI 3RD FLOOR,ARMY NAVY BUILDING,148 MAHATMA MTNL BUILDING, ROOM GANDHI MARG,FORT, MUMBAI- 601, 6TH FLOOR, PEDDER Vs. 400001, MAHARASHTRA ROAD, MUMBAI MUMBAI-400026, MAHARASHTRA अपीलाथ� Appellant ��थ� Respondent

Permanent Account Number of AAACT2544F Assessee:

अपीलाथ� �ारा/Appellant represented by: None ��थ� �ारा/Respondent represented by: Shri Mukesh Jain, AR

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:

This appeal is directed against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mumbai ["Ld. CIT(E)"] rejecting the assessee's application filed in Form No.10AB seeking renewal of registration u/s 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act").

ITA 5143/MUM/2026 THE INDIAN SOCIETY OF ADVERTISERS 2. The assessee filed an application in Form No.10AB seeking renewal of registration u/s 12AB of the Act. During the course of proceedings, the Ld. CIT(E) issued notices calling upon the assessee to furnish various documents and explanations in support of the application. According to the Ld. CIT(E), the assessee failed to comply with the notices issued and the application was incomplete. Accordingly, the application came to be rejected by the impugned order.

Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.

3.

When the appeal was called for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite service of notice. We, therefore, proceed to dispose of the appeal ex parte qua the assessee, after hearing the submissions of the Ld. Departmental Representative and upon perusal of the material available on record, including the grounds raised in the memorandum of appeal.

4.

The Ld. Departmental Representative relied upon the findings recorded by the Ld. CIT(E) and submitted that the assessee failed to furnish complete details and documents as called for during the course of proceedings and, therefore, the Ld. CIT(E) was justified in rejecting the application.

We have heard the submissions of the Ld. DR and carefully perused the material available on record.

5.

Though none appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing, we have carefully considered the grounds raised in the

ITA 5143/MUM/2026 THE INDIAN SOCIETY OF ADVERTISERS memorandum of appeal. The principal grievance of the assessee is that the impugned order has been passed on an erroneous assumption that there was non-compliance with the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(E), whereas the assessee had, in fact, furnished the requisite details and documents in response to the notice dated 13/11/2025 and further submitted clarifications on 15/12/2025.

6.

The grounds of appeal specifically state that the assessee had furnished, inter alia, its registration under the Companies Act, copies of earlier registration certificates, memorandum and articles of association, note on the nature of activities, acknowledgement of the renewal application, clarification regarding the irrevocability and dissolution clauses, details of receipts and income, copies of returns of income, audited financial statements, Darpan registration, Board resolutions and other documents called for by the Ld. CIT(E). It is also the case of the assessee that the impugned order has been passed without considering the aforesaid material and without assigning any specific reasons as to how the alleged non-compliance persisted despite the submissions made.

7.

On perusal of the impugned order, we find that the application has been rejected primarily on the ground of non- compliance and incomplete submission of documents. However, the grounds of appeal specifically assert that the requisite documents and explanations had already been furnished before the Ld. CIT(E). Whether the documents were in fact filed and whether they satisfy the requirements of law are matters requiring verification at the end of the Ld. CIT(E).

ITA 5143/MUM/2026 THE INDIAN SOCIETY OF ADVERTISERS 8. We further find that the impugned order does not deal with the specific submissions which, according to the assessee, were filed during the course of proceedings. It is a settled principle that where an assessee claims to have complied with the requisitions made by the prescribed authority, such material deserves due consideration before an adverse view is taken. The authority is also required to pass a reasoned and speaking order dealing with the submissions and evidences placed on record.

9.

Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, and in the interest of substantial justice, we are of the considered opinion that the matter deserves to be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for de novo adjudication. The Ld. CIT(E) shall verify the documents and explanations stated to have been furnished by the assessee in response to the notices issued during the course of proceedings, afford the assessee an adequate and effective opportunity of hearing, permit the assessee to place on record any further material in support of its application and thereafter pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law.

9.1. Since none appeared before us on behalf of the assessee, we also direct the assessee to extend full cooperation in the remand proceedings and promptly comply with all notices and requisitions that may be issued by the Ld. CIT(E). We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the assessee's claim and all issues are left open for adjudication by the Ld. CIT(E) in accordance with law.

ITA 5143/MUM/2026 THE INDIAN SOCIETY OF ADVERTISERS In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is 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.

Copy to: THE INDIAN SOCIETY OF ADVERTISERS, 3RD FLOOR,ARMY NAVY 1 BUILDING,148 MAHATMA GANDHI MARG,FORT, MUMBAI-400001, MAHARASHTRA THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI, 2 MTNL BUILDING, ROOM 601, 6TH FLOOR, PEDDER ROAD, MUMBAI, 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 →