SHREE RATADIA GAUSHALA,GUJARAT vs. ITO - WARD 4, GANDHIDHAM (BHUJ - 2), BHUJ

ITA No.870/Rjt/2026 is against the order of Ld. CIT(E) dt. 07.03.2026 by the application of the assessee seeking registration u/s. 12AB of the Act r.w.s. 12A(1)(ac)(vi)(B) of the Act was rejected and ITA No.871/Rjt/2026 against the order of the Ld. CIT(E) dt. 07.03.2026 by the application of the assessee for approval u/s 80G Sub-Section 5 of the Act was rejected.

Since, issues are common therefore first we taken ITA No.870/Rjt/2026 and our finding will apply mutatis and mutandis to ITA No.871/Rjt/2026.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a trust and had filed an application seeking registration under Section 12AB of the Act. During the course of proceedings, the Ld. CIT(E) called upon the assessee to furnish certain details, However, the assessee did not furnish the requisite details despite issuance of notices and opportunities granted. Accordingly, the application filed by the assessee was rejected on the ground that no documents/details were filed even after issuance of notices.

At the outset, it is noticed that the present appeal has been filed with a delay of 4 days. The assessee has filed an application seeking condonation of delay explaining the reasons for the delay. Having considered the averments made in the condonation application and keeping in view the principles of substantial justice, we are satisfied that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within the prescribed period. Accordingly, the delay of 4 days is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 6. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT (E) assessee is in appal before this tribunal. At the time of hearing Ld. AR submitted that the non-compliance was not deliberate and that the trust should be afforded one more opportunity to place the necessary documents on record. It was further submitted that in the interest of justice, the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh consideration. 7. On the other hand, the Ld. DR supported the impugned order and submitted that the assessee had failed to comply with the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(E). 8. We have heard, the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. 9. We note that the application for registration has been rejected primarily for non-furnishing of requisite details. Considering that the issue relates to registration of a trust and that the matter should be decided on merits after affording adequate opportunity, we are of the view that one more opportunity deserves to be granted to the assessee. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law after providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to comply with the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(E) and furnish all requisite details and documents as may be called for. 10. Since, issues involved in ITA No.871/Rjt/2026 is identical except the variation regarding the application filed by the assessee u/s 80G Sub-Section 5 of the Act, which was rejected by the Ld. CIT(E) therefore our finding as given in ITA No.870/Rjt/2026 will apply mutatis and mutandis to this appeal also accordingly this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.

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