SRI SAI SEVA SANSTHAN,VAPI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed an application in Form No. 10AB for of registration u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(iv) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(E) had called for certain details from the assessee in order to examine the genuineness of the activities of the trust and to satisfy himself that the activities were in consonance with the objects of the trust. As no compliance was made by the assessee, the Ld. CIT(E)

Shri P M Jagasheth, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) had allowed only one opportunity of being heard on 17.02.2026. Further that the Ld. CIT(E) had passed the order without taking into account substantial documents and evidences filed along with the application. The Ld. AR, therefore, requested that the assessee may be allowed another opportunity of being heard by setting aside the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E).

We have carefully considered the facts of the case and the material available on record. It is observed that the application of the assessee- trust for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iv) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 came to be rejected by the Ld. CIT(E) primarily on account of non- compliance with the notice issued seeking certain documents and clarifications. From the records, it is evident that only one effective opportunity was granted to the assessee. The interest of natural justice cannot be served by rejecting the application of the assessee by allowing only one opportunity. Though the Ld. CIT(E) has mentioned in the order that notices were issued from time of time, we don’t find reference of any notice other than the notice dated 17.02.2026. Considering that the assessee is a charitable trust seeking registration under the provisions of the Act and that the issue relates to the examination of its objects and activities, we are of the considered view that one more opportunity deserves to be afforded to the assessee to place the requisite material before the Ld. CIT(E). The principles of natural justice require that a reasonable and effective opportunity of being heard be granted before an adverse decision is taken. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the application, we deem it appropriate, in the interest of justice, to set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. The assessee shall furnish all the documents, explanations and evidences as may be called for by the Ld. CIT(E) and shall fully

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

The application for approval u/s. 80G(5) of the Act was rejected by the Ld. CIT(E) for the reason that the assessee was not having a valid registration u/s. 12A/12AB of the Act. Since the matter regarding registration u/s. 12A of the Act has been set aside to the Ld. CIT(E), the present appeal in respect of approval u/s. 80G(5) of the Act is also set aside to the file of Ld.CIT(E), who should re-adjudicate the issue of grant of approval u/s. 80G(5) of the Act, after first deciding the issue of registration u/s. 12A/12AB of the Act.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

In the final result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.