BG PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. EXEMPTION WARD 1, JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 86/JPR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 July 2026AY 2019-207 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee had valid registration under section 12A for both assessment years in question. Therefore, the denial of exemption solely on the ground of non-registration was unsustainable.

What were the facts?

The assessee society claimed exemption under sections 11/12 of the Income Tax Act. The exemption was denied due to alleged lack of valid registration under section 12A. The assessee contended it possessed valid registration certificates for the relevant assessment years.

What were the issues?

Whether the denial of exemption under sections 11/12 was justified due to the alleged lack of valid registration under section 12A, when the assessee claimed to possess such registration.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11,Section 12,Section 12A,Section 143(3),Section 143(1),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES, “SMC” BENCH, JAIPUR

Before: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA

Hearing: 15.07.2026Pronounced: 21.07.2026

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No.1229/JPR/2025
ITA No.86/JPR/2026

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, “SMC” BENCH, JAIPUR BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1229/JPR/2025 (Assessment Year:2022-23)

BG Professional Vs. DLC-WX(295(1) Education Society Kailash Tower Lal Kothi 228 City Centere Sansar Tonk Road Chand Road, Jaipur �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No:AAATB 7213 N Appellant .. Respondent ITA No.86/JPR/2026 (Assessment Year: 2019-20) BG Professional Vs. Exemption Ward 1 Education Society Kailash Tower, 301-309, 228 City Centere Sansar Satya Vihar Greater Chand Road, Jaipur Kailash Colony, Vidhayak Nagar, Jaipur �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AAATB 7213 N Appellant .. Respondent

Appellant by : Sh. Ashok Kumar Gupta, Adv. Respondent by : Mrs. Aarti Rawat, JCIT Date of Hearing 15.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement 21.07.2026

P a g e | 2 ITA No.1229/JPR/2025 and ITA No.86/JPR/2026 BG Professional Education Society O R D E R

Both the appeals relate to the same assessee, for different assessment years and arise from separate orders passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “Ld. CIT(E)”), dated 22.07.2025 and 14.11.2025 under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).Since the issues raised in both the appeals are interrelated, both the appeals were taken up for hearing together.

2.

The grounds raised by the assessee reads as under in ITA No.1229/JPR/2025:- 1. No Valid Notice u/s 143(2) That the learned Authorities below have grosslyerred in law and facts in in serving notice u/s143(2) without specifying the issues for selection of case for assessment. 2. Non est. assessment order That the learned Authorities below have grosslyerred in law and facts in passing assessment order u/s 143(3) without making mandatory compliance u/s 144B namely draft assessment order was not issued and served upon the assessee. Thus and therefore assessment order is without jurisdiction and bad in law / non est. 3. Selection for compulsory scrutiny was without jurisdiction That the learned Authorities below have grossly erred in law and facts in selecting the case compulsory scrutiny on the reason that registration u/s 12AA and 80G was cancelled by the CIT exemption WHARE as facts are that registration and 80G certificate was very much in force during the (F.Y. 2021-22) Α.Υ. 2022-23. Thus and therefore reason of selection of case was invalid. 4. Decision making Process is Perverse:- (a) That the learned Authorities below have grosslyerred in law and facts in not considering all details/information/documents submitted in compliance of notice u/s 142(1). (b) That the learned Authorities below have grossly erred in law and facts in not applying his mind on the submission made in compliance of allegation /quarry narrated in the notice issued u/s 142(1) and therefore Ld. AO did not passed specking order which is required under law. 5. Assessment is Invalid because SOP not followed :- That the learned Authorities below have grosslyerred in law and facts in passing assessment order u/s 143(3) RWS. 144B

P a g e | 3 ITA No.1229/JPR/2025 and ITA No.86/JPR/2026 BG Professional Education Society without following SOP. Such as ILDP has not been prepared in form AU-8 and further assessment order has been passed not as per format AU9 (format for final assessment order).

6.

Addition of Opening Balance Rs. 46,20,311/- without jurisdiction:- That the learned Authorities below have grossly erred in law and facts in making addition of opening balance Rs.46,20,311/- The action of the Ld. AO is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary, against the facts of the case and also against the principles of natural justice.

7.

Addition of Rs. 2,71,595/- without jurisdiction :- That the learned Authorities below have grossly erred in law and facts in making addition 271595/- without jurisdiction and addition is arbitrary and unjustified.

8.

That the learned Authorities below have grosslyerred in law and facts in charging interest u/s 234(B) of Rs. 3,15,360/-, 234(D) of Rs. 322/-.

9.

That the appellant reserves his right to add, amend OR alter the ground of appeal on OR before the date of appeal hearing

3.

The grounds raised by the assessee reads as under in ITA No.86/JPR/2026:- 1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. NFAC(A) has grossly erred in deciding the appeal ex-parte, without providing sufficient opportunity to appellant, here the Ld. NFAC(A) ought to have decided the appeal on merits instead of dismissing the appeal for non-attendance.

2.

The Ld. NFAC(A) as well as Ld. ITO Exemption, have grossly erred in passing rectification order u/s 254/154/143(1) of the IT Act, without giving the effect of amount as applied for charitable purposes by the assesse.

3.

The Learned NFAC (A) is grossly erred in confirming the order of Ld. ITO Exemption whereas he Rejected the claim of Rs. 2,20,066/- in relation of Application of Income under section 11(1)(a) of Income Tax Act, arbitrarily on erroneous facts and superfluous reasons without bringing out the relevant material facts.

4.

The Ld. NFAC as well as Ld. ITO Exemption have grossly erred in following the provision of section 11 of the IT Act, 1961.

5.

The Ld. NFAC as well as Ld. ITO Exemption have Grossly erred in imposing interest under section 234A,234B and 234C.

P a g e | 4 ITA No.1229/JPR/2025 and ITA No.86/JPR/2026 BG Professional Education Society 6. The appellant craved the right to add, DLEETE, amend OR abandon any of the grounds of appeal either before OR at the time of hearing of appeal 4. At the outset, it was stated that in both the appeals filed by the assessee, the solitary issue was denial of grant of exemption claimed by the assessee u/s 11/12 of the Act, on account of the absence of a valid registration as a charitable entity in terms of provisions of Section 12A of the Act. In the case of the assessee, pertaining to AY 2022-23, the exemption was denied in regular scrutiny assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Act, and in the case of the assessee pertaining to AY 2019-20, the denial of claim of exemption was made in the intimation made u/s 143(1) of the Act while processing the return of income, noting the fact that the assessee had not furnished details of registration granted to it u/s 12A of the Act in the return filed in AY 2019-20.The assessee had filed a rectification application to the CPC against the denial of grant of benefit of exemption, which was dismissed by the CPC against which the assessee carried the matter in appeal to Ld. CIT(A), who upheld the order of CPC. The assessee carried the matter to the ITAT, who in turn restored back to the CPC/ AO for consideration afresh, who in turn reiterated the earlier order, which again was confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) in second round. 5. Therefore, in effect, in the appeal of the assessee for both the years, the issue pertains to denial of grant of exemption claimed u/s 11/12 of the Act, on account of the assessee being found to be not registered as a charitable entity u/s 12A of the Act.

P a g e | 5 ITA No.1229/JPR/2025 and ITA No.86/JPR/2026 BG Professional Education Society 6. During the course of hearing before me, ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that, the assessee was in possession of a valid certificate of registration for both the years. On the earlier occasion, when the matter came up for hearing before me, i.e. on 24th June 2026, ld. Counsel for the assessee had pointed out, that the denial of grant of registration u/s 12A of the Act, by the Ld. CIT(E), had been contested by the assessee before the ITAT, who in turn had restored the matter back to the Ld. CIT(E). It was pointed out, that the ITAT had noted, that the assessee had a valid registration granted to it vide order dated 24.09.2021 for the impugner period and therefore, the ITAT had restored the matter back to the Ld. CIT(E) to examine the claim of the assessee and adjudicate the issue accordingly. 7. Considering the averment of the ld. Counsel for the assessee, the Ld. DR was directed to determine the status of the issue of the grant of registration to the assessee, restored back to the ld. CIT(E) by the ITAT. During the course of hearing today, the DR placed before me a report received from the AO, in the case of the assessee, the contents of which are reproduced hereunder:- To, The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Sr. DR)-III, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Sub- In the appeal matter pending before the Hon'ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur in the case of BG Professional Education Society, (PAN-AAAΤΒ7213N), ITA No. 1229/JPR/2025 for AY 2022-23-reg *******

P a g e | 6 ITA No.1229/JPR/2025 and ITA No.86/JPR/2026 BG Professional Education Society Kindly refer to your letter No. 98 dated 05.06.2026 on the aforementioned subject wherein it was requested to submit the status of implementation of the decision rendered by Hon'ble ITAT while deciding appeal No. IIA No. 1229/JPR/2025 for AY 2022-23 vide its combined order dated 23.11.2022. 2. In this connection, it is submitted that the decision rendered by Hon'ble ITAT vide order ΠΛ No. 713 & 743/JPR/2024 dated 08.01.2025 was implemented by this office vide orders both dated 09.07.2024. During the set-aside proceedings, the assessee requested to withdraw both the applications filed for registration u/s 12AB and approval u/s 80G and subsequently both the applications were rejected as withdrawn. 3. it is imperative to furnish here that the assessee has valid registration u/s 12AA and approval u/s 80G prior to 01.04.2021. It is further submitted that the assessee had obtained valid registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(i) and approval u/s 80G(5)(i) in form 10AC. Hence. registration u/s 12AB and approval u/s 80G is valid during the AY 2022-23 4. A copy of certificate u/s 12A(1)(ac)(i) and registration u/s 12AA prior to 01.04.2021 are attached herewith.

8.

A perusal of the above would reveal that at para 3 of the report, the AO has categorically stated that the assessee had a valid registration u/s 12AA and 80G prior to 01.04.2021 and had pointed out a valid registration for AY 2022-23 also. Copies of the certificates granting registration were also furnished along with the report of the AO. 9. In view of the admission of fact by the AO as above, that the assessee had a valid registration u/s 12A of the Act both for AY 2019- 20 and for AY 2022-23, the orders of the Authorities below denying the assessee the benefit of exemption u/s 12A of the Act, solely for the reason of non grant of registration is not sustainable. The AO for both the years i.e. AY 2022-23 and 2019-20 is directed to grant the assessee the benefit of exemption u/s 11 and 12 of the Act.

P a g e | 7 ITA No.1229/JPR/2025 and ITA No.86/JPR/2026 BG Professional Education Society 10. In effect, both the appeals of the assessee are accordingly allowed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 21.07.2026

Sd/- (Annapurna Gupta) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated 21.07.2026 Mittali, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT By Order, Asst. Registrar ITAT, Jaipur

More judgments on Section 11

All 7,190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →