SRI SIDDHARAM RANJIT BHAKKTI VIHAR FOUNDATION,NASHIK vs. EXEMPTION WARD 1(1), NASHIK, NASHIK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1313/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 May 20264 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and restored the matter to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. The assessee was granted an opportunity to present its case with supporting documents, with a caution to be vigilant in future compliance.

What were the facts?

The assessee's application for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) was rejected by the CIT(E) due to non-compliance with notices. The assessee cited personal reasons, specifically the ill health of a senior family member, for the delay in providing information.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the registration application without providing adequate opportunity, and if the non-compliance was due to sufficient cause warranting restoration of the case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A(1)(ac),Section 12AB(1)(b)(i)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD & MS. ASTHA CHANDRA

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Joshi and Shri Dinkle Hariya
For Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde

आदेश / ORDER

PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM : The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 06.11.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune [“CIT(E)”] whereby he rejected the application of the assessee filed before him on 30.06.2024 in Form No. 10AB under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”).

2.

There is a delay of 110 days in filing of this appeal before the Tribunal for which the assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for such delay. After hearing both the sides, we are of the view that the delay is attributable to the sufficient cause. We, therefore, in light of the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2025 Live Law (SC) 339, condone the said delay and proceed to decide the appeal.

3.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :

2 ITA No.1313/PUN/2025

“1. The Ld. CIT(Exemptions) erred on facts and in law in rejecting the application filed by the assessee in Form 10AB seeking registration under Sub clause (iii) of clause (ac) of sub section (1) of Section (1) of Section 12A of the Act and cancellation of provisional registration granted on 24/09/2021 under section 12AB read with section 12A(1)(ac) (vi) of the Act; on the ground that the assessee failed to comply with the notices and prove the genuineness of its activities. 2. On the basis of facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (Exemptions) erred in rejecting registration application and cancelling the provisional registration without without providing the appellant adequate opportunity of being heard before passing the order in Form 10AD which is in violation of the Principle of Natural Justice. 3. On the basis of facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (Exemptions) erred in rejecting registration application and cancelling the provisional registration by passing the order in Form 10AD without appreciating the details and documents submitted by the appellant. The appellant craves to alter, amend and modify any ground of appeal.”

4 Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on receipt of the assessee’s application filed in Form No. 10AB u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act on 30.06.2024 along with annexures thereto, with a view to verify the genuineness of the activities of the assessee and compliance to requirements of any other law for the time being in force, the Ld. CIT(E) issued notice on 14.08.2024 through ITBA portal/email which was duly served on the assessee requesting the assessee to upload certain information/clarification contained therein by 29.08.2024. Since the assessee failed to comply with the said notice within the due date, the Ld. CIT(E) issued another notice dated 17.10.2024 seeking compliance by 22.10.2024. Since there was no response from the side of the assessee despite number of opportunities granted, the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application for regular registration and also cancelled the provisional registration granted earlier by observing as under:

“5. The information / details were called for under the provisions of section 12AB(1)(b)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. These are the basic details required to ascertain the overall nature of the activities of the assessee and are directly relevant to the present proceedings. However, the assessee has failed to comply despite giving sufficient opportunities as discussed above including an opportunity of being heard. 6. Thus, the assessee has failed to furnish the details called for under the provisions of section 12AB(1)(b)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to verify the genuineness of activities of the trust / institution and to verify the 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. 7. In absence of the compliance to the above requirement, it is not possible to arrive at any conclusion about the genuineness of activities of the assessee

3 ITA No.1313/PUN/2025

and the compliance to the 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. 8. It is clear from the above that the assessee was given sufficient opportunity to comply, but it has not complied to the same. It seems that the assessee is not having any supporting documents / evidence to submit. The assessee has failed to comply with the provisions of section 12AB(1)(b)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Hence, the undersigned is unable to draw any satisfactory conclusion about genuineness of activities of the assessee and the compliance to the 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. Therefore, the undersigned has left no alternative but to reject the application. 9. In view of the above, the application filed by the assessee is hereby rejected and the provisional registration granted on 24/09/2021 under section 12AB read with section 12A(1)(ac) (vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is hereby cancelled.”

5.

Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and all the grounds of appeal relate thereto.

6.

The Ld. AR submitted that non-compliance to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(E) was not intentional. He submitted that the father of the Director of the assessee trust, who is a very senior citizen, aged about 90 years, was not keeping well and required to be hospitalized on number of occasions due to which the Director of the trust could not keep himself updated about the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(E). He submitted that the given an opportunity, the assessee is in a position to substantiate its case before the Ld. CIT(E) by filing the requisite details/documents to his satisfaction. He, therefore, humbly prayed that, in the interest of justice, the matter may be set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) to adjudicate the same afresh on merits after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

7.

The Ld. DR had no objection the above request of the Ld. AR.

8.

We have heard the Ld. Representatives of the parties and perused the records. It is an admitted fact that due to non-compliance of the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(E), he rejected the assessee’s application for grant of registration u/s 12A of the Act and also cancelled the provisional registration granted earlier. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the non-compliance of the notices was not intentional but occurred due to the reasons cited above. It is the submission of the

4 ITA No.1313/PUN/2025

Ld. Counsel for the assessee that given an opportunity, the assessee is in a position to substantiate its case by filing all the relevant supporting details/documents/ evidence before the Ld. CIT(E). Considering the totality of the facts and in the circumstances of the assessee’s case, we are of the view that it would be judicially expedient and in the interest of justice and fair play, if the matter is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) to consider the assessee’s application for registration afresh and decide the same on merits, in accordance with fact and law after allowing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee to present and substantiate its case. Needless to say, the assessee shall remain vigilant in accessing emails and provide the requisite support to the Ld. CIT(E) in terms of submitting the relevant details/documentary evidence as may be required/called upon on the appointed date without seeking adjournment under any pretext unless required for sufficient cause, failing which the Ld. CIT(E) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We order accordingly.

9.

In the result, the appeal of assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 25th May, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (Manish Borad) (Astha Chandra) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 25th May, 2026. रदि Ravi Kumar Digitally signed by Ravi Kumar Date: 2026.05.27 12:07:43 +05'30' आदेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. दिभ गीय प्रदिदनदि, आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण, “बी” बेंच, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. //सत्य दपि प्रदि// True Copy// आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,

सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

More judgments on Section 12A(1)(ac)

All 537 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A(1)(ac) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →