NOCCI BALASORE INFRASTRUCTURE COMPANY,BALASORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 422/CTK/2025Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 May 2026AY 2025-263 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had complied with most notices but failed to produce all documents on the last occasion. In the interest of justice, the case was restored to the CIT(E) for readjudication, granting the assessee an adequate opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an application for registration under Section 12AB, which was rejected by the CIT(Exemption). The assessee, a company incorporated under Section 25 of the Companies Act, claimed to receive substantial government funding and argued that it was denied an adequate opportunity to present its case. The CIT(E) had cancelled the assessee's registration under Section 12A.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Exemption) erred in rejecting the Section 12AB registration application without providing the assessee with a proper opportunity to be heard and present all required documents.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “HYBRID COURT AT CUTTACK”

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Mishra, AR
For Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Hearing: 25.05.2026Pronounced: 25.05.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “HYBRID COURT AT CUTTACK” BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.422/CTK/2025 Assessment Year: 2025-26 NOCCI, Balasore CIT(Exemption), Hyderabad Infrastructure Company

C-12, Nocci Facilitation Vs Centre, Ganeswarpur Industrial Estate, Remuna Goleu, Odisha-756019. (PAN: AADCN1818R) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by : Shri P. K. Mishra, AR Revenue by : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 25.05.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 25.05.2026

ORDER PER BENCH: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Hyderabad [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(E)’] dated 26.06.2025 rejecting the application filed in Form 10AB seeking registration u/s 12AB of the Act.

2.

Shri P. K. Mishra, AR represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, ld. CIT DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

ITA No.422/CTK/2025 3. The ld. AR drew our attention to page 12 of the paper book to submit that the company is incorporated under the provisions of section 25 of the Companies Act. The ld. AR further drew our attention to page 42 to submit that as per Special clause 3 of Licence u/s 25 of the Companies Act 1956, it has been categorically mentioned that no remuneration or other benefit in money or money’s worth shall be given by the company to any of its members. The ld. AR also drew our attention to page 44 of the paper-book to submit that the funds of the assessee company is received substantially from the government. It was further submitted that the ld. CIT(E) had issued notice dated 17.06.2025 which is placed at page 148-149 of the paper-book which could not be replied. It was submitted by the ld. AR that the assessee has sought for one week time to appear before the ld. CIT(E) along with all the documents required. It was the submission that however, in the meantime, the ld. CIT(E) had passed an order cancelling the assessee’s registration u/s 12A vide an order dated 26.06.2025. It was the submission that the assessee was also enjoying the benefit of exemption u/s 12A earlier till cancellation. It was prayed that the assessee may be granted one more opportunity to appear before the ld. CIT(E) to explain its case.

4.

In reply, the ld. CIT-DR submitted that the ld. CIT(E) has already considered all the issues. It was the submission that the order of the ld. CIT(A) is liable to be upheld.

5.

We have considered the rival submissions. As it is noticed that the assessee has complied all notices except the last notice. Admittedly, the 2

ITA No.422/CTK/2025 assessee has explained its substantial stand and it is only on account of failure to produce all the documents in the last occasion, the ld. CIT(E) passed the order against the assessee without considering the documents submitted by the assessee. This being so, in the interest of justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.

6.

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

Cuttack, the 25th May, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- [Rajesh Kumar] [George Mathan] लेखा सदस्य/Accountant Member न्याययक सदस्य/Judicial Member

Dated: 25.05.2026. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent – 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR),

//True copy// By order Assistant Registrar

More judgments on Section 12AB

All 5,972 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →