PADMASHREE MANIBHAI DESAI SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL,BEED vs. CIT (E), PUNE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the CIT's order and restored the matter for fresh adjudication. The assessee is directed to respond to notices and provide necessary documents, and the CIT is to grant a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
What were the facts?
The assessee's application for registration under Section 12AB was rejected by the CIT, Exemption, Pune, due to non-compliance with notices. The assessee also failed to appear before the CIT and did not file an adjournment application for the appeal hearing.
What were the issues?
Whether the rejection of registration application without a decision on merits, due to non-compliance and absence, is justified, and whether the assessee should be given another opportunity to present their case.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE
Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2955/PUN/2025 Padmashree Manibhai Desai Vs. CIT, Exemption, Pune. Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, At Post Nalwandi, Tal. And Dist. Beed, Beed H.O., 431122. PAN : AACTP4715B Appellant Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Amit Bobde Date of hearing : 23.04.2026 Date of pronouncement : 11.05.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 17.10.2024 passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune rejecting the application for registration u/s 12AB of the IT Act. 2. There is delay in filing of the present appeal. We are satisfied with the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay duly supported by an affidavit that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the
2 ITA No.2955/PUN/2025 prescribed time limit. After hearing Ld. DR, we condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeal. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee filed an application for registration in Form 10AB under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the IT Act on 30.06.2024. 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 by the institution as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects, notices dated 12.08.2024 and 27.08.2024 were issued through ITBA portal requesting the assessee to upload various information detailed in notice. Since the assessee has not complied with the above notices, Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune rejected the application for registration and also cancelled the provisional registration granted on 05.04.2022 u/s 12AB r.w.s. 12(1)(ac)(vi) of the IT Act. 4. It is the above order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 5. When the appeal was called for hearing, neither anybody appeared on behalf of assessee nor any application for adjournment
3 ITA No.2955/PUN/2025 was filed by the assessee despite due service of notice of hearing. Therefore, we proceed to decide the appeal on the basis of material available on record as well as after hearing Ld. DR. 6. We have heard Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. In this regard, we find that the application for registration was rejected since the assessee remained absent before Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune. We also find that Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune has not given any adverse finding on the merits of the case. 7. Considering the totality of facts of the case & in the interest of justice and without going into merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune and restore the matter back to him with a direction to decide the application for registration afresh and as per fact and law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune in this regard and to produce requisite documents/evidences in support of application for registration, otherwise, Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune shall be at liberty to pass
4 ITA No.2955/PUN/2025 appropriate orders as per law. Thus, the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 11th day of May, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; �दनांक / Dated : 11th May, 2026. Sujeet/DOC Digitally signed by Sujeet Kumar Sujeet Kumar Sharma Sharma Date: 2026.05.12 12:20:56 +05'30' आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The CIT, Exemption, Pune. 4. The Pr. CIT/CIT concerned. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “B” ब�च, 5. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 6. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.
More judgments on Section 12AB
- Desire Foundation, Jaipur vs Income Tax Officer, JaipurITA 1646/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Sheo Narayan Trust, Khajpura vs CIT Exemption, PatnaITA 554/PAT/2026[2025-2026]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2025-2026
- Ss Early Learning Society, Hyderabad vs CIT (Exemption), HyderabadITA 1208/HYD/2025[2026-27]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2026-27
- Shri Brajshiromani Laxmandas Sewa Trust… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(1), Mathura…ITA 592/AGR/2026[2026-2027]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2026-2027
- Shri Brajshiromani Laxmandas Sewa Trust… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(1), Mathura…ITA 591/AGR/2026[2026-2027]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2026-2027
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Manoj Kumar Das vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Superwealth Financial Enterprises Private Limited, Khordha vs. Joint Commissioner Good And Service Tax Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Simanchal Sahoo vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Prafulla Chandra Khatua, Mayurbhanj vs. The State Tax Officer Of CT And GST, MayurbhanjOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sidhivinayak Roadways, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise, Rourkela Commissionerate, RourkelaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026