SOCIETY FOR TRAINING, ACTION, RESEARCH & REHABILITATION (STARR),BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, BHUBANESWAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 86/CTK/2026Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack20 May 2026AY 2023-243 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the assessee did not possess valid registration under section 12A/12AA of the Act for the impugned assessment year, the denial of benefits under sections 11 and 12 by the lower authorities was correct.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a society, applied for registration under the new provisions of the Income Tax Act but it was rejected by the CIT(Exemption) due to a mention of a wrong section. Consequently, the Assessing Officer denied the benefit of sections 11 and 12 for the assessment year 2023-24.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is eligible for benefits under sections 11 and 12 without valid registration under section 12A/12AA, and whether the Tribunal can direct the filing of a fresh application for registration.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11,Section 12,Section 12A,Section 12AA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Bijay Kumar Patra, AR
For Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR
Hearing: 20.05.2026Pronounced: 20.05.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.86/CTK/2026 Assessment Year: 2023-24 Society For Training, Action, ITO(Exemption), Ward- Research & Rehabilitation Bhubaneswar (STARR) Vs N-6/432, IRC Village, Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar- 751015 (PAN: AABAS 7877 D) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by : Shri Bijay Kumar Patra, AR Revenue by : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 20.05.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 20.05.2026

ORDER PER BENCH: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] in appeal no. NFAC/2022-23/10447480 dated 23.11.2025.

2.

Shri Bijay Kumar Patra, AR represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Vijay Singh, ld. CIT DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

ITA No.86/CTK/2026 3. It was submitted by the ld. AR that the assessee got registration u/s 12AA vide order dated 24.03.2006. It was the submission that under the new provisions, the assessee had applied for registration on 29.09.2020. It was the submission that on account of mentioning wrong section, the ld. CIT(Exemption) has rejected the application for registration. It was the submission that consequently, the Assessing Officer has completed the assessment for the assessment year 2023-24 denying the assessee to the benefit of section 11 and 12 of the Act. It was the submission that the ld. CIT(A) has also rejected the appeal of the assessee. It was the submission that the assessee should be granted another opportunity to file necessary application before the ld. CIT(Exemption).

4.

In reply, the Sr. DR has submitted that the appeal against the order refusing the benefit by the ld. CIT(Exemption) should have been filed by the assessee to the Tribunal itself. This has not been done. It was the submission that for the assessment year 2023-24, the Tribunal cannot give relief in directing the assessee to file fresh application for registration u/s 12A.

5.

We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the facts in the present case clearly shows that for the impugned assessment year, the assessee does not have registration u/s 12A. It has also been admitted by the ld. AR that the assessee had applied for registration u/s 12A but on account of reference to the wrong provision, the registration has been rejected by the ld. CIT(Exemption) as not maintainable. The ld. AR has

ITA No.86/CTK/2026 also admitted that the assessee has not filed any appeal against the said rejection order. It is clear that as on date, the assessee does not have a registration u/s 12A/12AA of the Act. This being so, we find no error in the order of the Assessing Officer or the ld. CIT(A) refusing the grant of benefit of deduction u/s 11 and 12 of the Act. This being so, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Kolkata, the 20th May, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rajesh Kumar] [George Mathan] लेखा सदस्य/Accountant Member न्याययक सदस्य/Judicial Member

Dated: 20.05.2026. 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 11

All 7,190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →