MANAV VIKAS SAMITI,CHANDIGARH vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CHANDIGAR, CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1419/CHANDI/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 July 2026AY 2027-285 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the rejection was primarily due to non-compliance without a conclusive finding on the trust's activities. To ensure substantial justice, the matter was restored to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication after providing the assessee with an effective opportunity.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust applied for registration under Section 12AB, but the CIT(E) rejected it for non-compliance with notices and lack of sufficient documents. The assessee argued that proper opportunities were not given and notices were issued by an authority without jurisdiction.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of registration under Section 12AB was valid without providing a proper opportunity of hearing and in violation of principles of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A,Section 12AB,Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च�ीगढ़ �ायपीठ “बी” , च�ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE �ी लिलत कुमार, �ाियक सद� एवं �ी मनोज कुमार अ�वाल, लेखा सद� BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM & SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1419 & 1431 /Chd/ 2026 िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 2027-28 Manav Vikas Samiti बनाम The CIT (Exemption) Diocesan Pastoral Centre, Catholic Chandigarh Church, Sector 19-B, Chandigarh �ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AACTM4022E अपीलाथ�/Appellant ��थ�/Respondent िनधा�रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri George Kuruvilla Kunnathumpara, C.A and Shri Sanjeev Kumar Chaudhary, C.A राज� की ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Geetinder Mann, CIT DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 01/07/2026 उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 14/07/2026 आदेश/Order PER LALIET KUMAR, J.M: Both the above appeals have been filed by the Assessee against the respective orders of Ld. CIT(E), Chandigarh each dt. 17/03/2026, whereby the application filed by the assessee trust under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 seeking registration under section 12AB of the Act has been rejected. 2. Since both the above appeals were heard together therefore, they are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 3. We shall firstly deal with the appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 1419/Chd/2026 for A.Y. 2027-28, wherein Assessee has raised the following grounds: 1. Violation of Principles of natural Justice The learned CIT (Exemption), Chandigarh erred in rejecting the application for renewal of registration under section 12AB without providing a reasonable and effective opportunity of being heard to the Appellant. 2. Invalid Notice of hearing The learned Commissioner failed to appreciate that the notice of hearing was issued by CIT (Exemption), Delhi, who had no jurisdiction over the Appellant, rendering the notice invalid and unenforceable in law. Consequently, rejection based on such notice is wrong and bad in law. 3. Failure to Issue Fresh Notice After Transfer to correct Jurisdiction

The learned CIT (Exemption), Chandigarh erred in passing the impugned order without issuing any fresh notice after the transfer to correct jurisdiction. Hence the Appellant is denied an opportunity to comply with the notice or being heard in this matter. 4. Order Passed Without Due Process of Law The impugned order has been passed in gross violation of the mandatory procedural requirements under section 12AB and is therefore void ab initio. 5. Rejection Based on Non-Compliance Not Attributable to the Appellant The learned Commissioner failed to consider that the alleged non - submission of reply was not due to any fault or negligence on the part of the Appellant but was solely due to the Departments procedural lapses. 6. The above grounds are independent and without prejudice to the others. 7. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, or withdraw any ground of appeal at or before the time of hearing. 4. The assessee, Manav Vikas Samiti, filed an application on 23.09.2025 for registration under section 12A of the Act. During examination, the Ld. CIT(E) found that the documents submitted were not enough to prove that the activities of the assessee were genuine or in line with its stated objects. Therefore, a notice dated 06.01.2026 was issued asking the assessee to submit required details. However, the assessee did not file any reply and also did not ask for more time. Even after sufficient opportunity and transfer of the case to CIT(E), Chandigarh, no response was given.

4.1 The Ld. CIT(E) held that the assessee failed to respond to the notices and did not provide the necessary information to verify its activities. Due to non-submission of details, it was not possible to check whether the activities were genuine or as per the objects. The non-compliance showed that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the matter. Therefore, the application was treated as incomplete and was rejected.

5.

Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the assessee has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal.

6.

The Ld. AR submitted that the impugned order is liable to be quashed as the same has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice. It was contended that no effective opportunity of hearing was provided to the assessee before rejection of the application under section 12AB. The AR pointed out that the only

notice dated 06.01.2026 was issued by CIT(E), Delhi, who had no jurisdiction over the assessee, rendering the notice invalid in law.

6.1 It was further submitted that after transfer of jurisdiction to CIT(E), Chandigarh, no fresh notice was issued, thereby depriving the assessee of an opportunity to comply and present its case. The AR argued that the alleged non-compliance cannot be attributed to the assessee but is due to procedural lapses on the part of the Department. It was thus prayed that the order be set aside and the matter be restored for fresh adjudication after providing due opportunity.

7.

Per contra, The Ld. DR supported the order of the CIT(E) and submitted that sufficient opportunity was granted to the assessee through notice dated 06.01.2026, however, no compliance was made. It was argued that the assessee failed to furnish necessary documents to establish the genuineness of its activities, thereby justifying rejection of the application. The DR further contended that the assessee remained non-cooperative and did not pursue its application, and therefore adverse inference was rightly drawn. Relying on judicial precedents cited in the order, it was submitted that the authority is empowered to reject the application in case of non- compliance. Accordingly, the DR prayed for upholding the impugned order.

8.

We have heard the rival submissions and have carefully perused the material available on record. We find that the application of the assessee has been rejected primarily for want of supporting documents and non-compliance with the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(E). We further find that no conclusive finding has been recorded by the Ld. CIT(E) that the objects of the trust are non-charitable or that the activities carried out by the assessee are not genuine. The rejection has essentially been made because the requisite details and evidences were not available before the Ld. CIT(E) for examination. 8.1 The provisions of section 12AB require the Ld. CIT(E) to satisfy himself regarding the genuineness of the activities of the trust and the compliance of such activities with its stated objects. Such satisfaction can be arrived at only after examination of the relevant material and evidences. In a case where the application has been rejected solely on account of non-compliance and without examining the material which the assessee claims to possess and intends to produce, the ends of substantial

justice would require that one more effective opportunity be afforded to the assessee. 8.2 Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, and in the interest of substantial justice, we deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(E) and restore the matter to his file for fresh adjudication. The assessee shall furnish all requisite details, documentary evidences, books of account, activity reports, financial statements and such other information as may be called for by the Ld. CIT(E). The Ld. CIT(E) shall thereafter examine the application afresh in accordance with law and pass a speaking order after providing reasonable and adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 8.3 The assessee is directed to extend full cooperation during the remand proceedings and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. Failure to comply with the notices and directions issued by the Ld. CIT(E) shall entitle the Ld. CIT(E) to proceed in accordance with law on the basis of material available on record. 8.4 In view of the above, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. 9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 10. Since we have adjudicated the issues involved in the lead appeal in ITA No.1419/Chd/2026 in the foregoing paragraphs, and the facts, issues involved, grounds raised and the reasons recorded by the Ld. CIT(E) in the connected appeal bearing ITA No.1431/Chd/2026 are identical and arise out of the same set of facts and circumstances, our findings and conclusions rendered in the lead appeal shall apply mutatis mutandis to the present appeal as well. Accordingly, following our decision in ITA No.1419/Chd/2026, we set aside the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(E) in relation to the assessee's application for approval under section 80G of the Act and restore the matter to his file for fresh adjudication in accordance with law. The Ld. CIT(E) shall examine the claim of the assessee afresh after affording adequate and reasonable opportunity of being heard and after considering such documentary evidence and explanations as may be furnished by the assessee. The assessee is also directed to extend full cooperation in the proceedings and furnish all

requisite details as may be called for by the Ld. CIT(E). Subject to these observations, the appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. 11. In the result, both the above appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 14/07/2026 Sd/- Sd/- मनोज कुमार अ�वाल लिलत कुमार (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) (LALIET KUMAR) लेखा सद�/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �ाियक सद� /JUDICIAL MEMBER AG आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��थ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�/ CIT 4. आयकर आयु� (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च�ीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File

BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KENDRIYA SADAN, SECTOR-9A CHANDIGARH

More judgments on Section 12A

All 6,064 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →