KISAN VIDHYA PRASARAK MANDAL DHULE,PUNE vs. CIT (E) , PUNE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the CIT's order rejecting the registration application and restored the matter to the CIT's file. The CIT was directed to decide the application afresh after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an application for registration under Section 12AB of the IT Act. The CIT, Exemption, Pune issued notices seeking clarification and details, but the assessee failed to furnish complete explanations for discrepancies.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT correctly rejected the application for registration without providing sufficient opportunity for the assessee to rectify discrepancies.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.799/PUN/2026 Kisan Vidhya Prasarak Vs. CIT, Exemption, Pune. Mandal, A/P Nandre, Tal. & Dist.- Dhule- 424303. PAN : AACTK7922R Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Ramkrishna P. Daware (Virtual) Revenue by : Shri Mithun Shete Date of hearing : 23.06.2026 Date of pronouncement : 20.07.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 16.10.2024 passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune rejecting the application for registration u/s 12AB of the IT Act. 2. There is delay in filing of the present appeal. We are satisfied with the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay duly supported by an affidavit that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the
2 ITA No.799/PUN/2026 prescribed time limit. After hearing Ld. DR, we condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeal. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee has filed application for registration in Form No.10AB u/s 12A(1)(ac)(vi)- ITEM(B) of the IT Act on 25.04.2024. With a view to verify the genuineness of activities of the assessee and compliance to requirements of any other law for the time being in force by the trust/institution as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects, a notice was issued by Ld, CIT, Exemption, Pune through ITBA portal on 04.06.2024 requesting the assessee to upload certain information/clarification. In reply to the said notice, the desired information was furnished by the assessee. On verification of the information furnished by the assessee, Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune found certain discrepancies, therefore, issued another notice on 05.10.2024 and asked the assessee to furnish various other details on or before 14.10.2024. Since the assessee has not furnished any explanation to the discrepancies found by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune, the application filed by the assessee u/s 12A(1)(ac)(vi)- ITEM(B) of the IT Act rejected by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune.
3 ITA No.799/PUN/2026 4. It is the above order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 5. We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record including the paper book furnished by the assessee. In this regard, we find that it is the sole request of Ld. Counsel of the assessee that if one last opportunity is provided to the assessee, he is in a position to furnish all the relevant desired information in support of application for registration before Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune. 6. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice and without going into merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune and restore the matter back to his file with a direction to decide the application for registration afresh and as per fact and law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune in this regard and to produce relevant documents/evidences, if any, in support of application for registration u/s 12AB of the IT Act without taking any adjournment under any pretext, otherwise Ld. CIT, Exemption,
4 ITA No.799/PUN/2026 Pune shall be at liberty to pass appropriate orders as per law. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 20th day of July, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; �दनांक / Dated : 20th July, 2026. Sujeet/DOC Sujeet Kumar Digitally signed by Sujeet Kumar Sharma Sharma Date: 2026.07.22 11:38:03 आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : +05'30' अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The CIT, Exemption, Pune. 4. The Pr. CIT/CIT concerned. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” ब�च, 5. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 6. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.
More judgments on Section 12AB
- Desire Foundation, Jaipur vs Income Tax Officer, JaipurITA 1646/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Sheo Narayan Trust, Khajpura vs CIT Exemption, PatnaITA 554/PAT/2026[2025-2026]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2025-2026
- Ss Early Learning Society, Hyderabad vs CIT (Exemption), HyderabadITA 1208/HYD/2025[2026-27]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2026-27
- Shri Brajshiromani Laxmandas Sewa Trust… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(1), Mathura…ITA 592/AGR/2026[2026-2027]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2026-2027
- Shri Brajshiromani Laxmandas Sewa Trust… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(1), Mathura…ITA 591/AGR/2026[2026-2027]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2026-2027
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Zakir Hussain Ali Khan vs. Additional Commissioner (Appeals), BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Manorama Nayak, Khorda vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar Iv Circle, KhurdaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Chandan Kumar Bathual vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Cuttack-Iii Range, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Manoranjan Sadangi vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Gopalpur Range, GanjamOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Bijaya Kumar Parekh vs. State Tax Officer, CT And GST Balangir Circle, BalangirOrissa · 14 Oct 2026