SHREE PUSHKAR FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3773/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2026-27) Shree Pushkar CIT (Exemptions) Foundation Room No. 601, 6th Vs. Floor, Cumballa Hill 301/302, 3rd Floor, MTNL TE Building, Atlanta Centre, Near Pedder Road, Mumbai- Udyog Bhavan, Sonawala Road, 400026 Goregaon East, Mumbai-400 063 PAN/GIR No. AAWTS2303N (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Revenue by Shri Yogesh Kamat, Ld. DR Date of Hearing 23.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement 30.06.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, AM: This appeal is directed against the order dated 01.03.2026 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mumbai [“CIT (Exemption)”]in Form No.10AD under the provisions of section 12A read with section 12AB of the Income- tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”], whereby the application filed by the

2 ITA No. 3773/Mum/2026 Shree Pushkar Foundation assessee in Form No.10AB seeking renewal of registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act came to be rejected.

1.0 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(Exemption) erred in rejecting the application for regular registration u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act. 2.0 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(Exemption) erred in rejecting the application filed by the appellant trust for grant of exemption u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act due to non-compliance to notice issued. 3.0 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellant could not reply to notice as the same was not received over registered Email. The Ld. CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application without giving any further notice or communication. 4.0 The impugned order rejecting registration is in gross violation of principles of natural justice and therefore, bad in law and should be restored back to Ld. CIT(E). 3. Briefly stated, the facts emerging from the impugned order are that the assessee had filed an application in Form No.10AB on 29.09.2025 seeking renewal of registration under section 12AB of the Act. During the course of processing of the application, the learned CIT(Exemptions) observed that the application was not complete and all the documents required to accompany the application had not been furnished. Accordingly, a notice dated 30.01.2026 was issued calling upon the assessee to furnish the complete set of documents and details as prescribed under Rule 17A(2) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. According to the learned CIT(Exemptions), the assessee failed to comply with the terms of the said notice.

3 ITA No. 3773/Mum/2026 Shree Pushkar Foundation 4. The learned CIT(Exemptions) further observed that registration under section 12AB can be granted only after satisfying himself regarding the objects of the trust, the genuineness of its activities and compliance with such other laws as are material for achieving its charitable objects. Since the assessee had not furnished the requisite details, the learned CIT(Exemptions) recorded that he was unable to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion on the aforesaid statutory requirements and, therefore, rejected the application for renewal of registration under section 12AB. Consequently, by order dated 01.03.2026, the application was rejected on the ground of non-compliance with the notice issued. 5. During the course of hearing, the learned Authorised Representative(AR) submitted that the impugned order is unsustainable both on facts and in law. It was submitted that the application has been rejected merely on account of the alleged non-compliance with the notice dated 30.01.2026, without examining the charitable objects of the trust or the genuineness of its activities. The learned AR submitted that the notice relied upon by the learned CIT(Exemptions) was never received on the registered e-mail address of the assessee and, therefore, the assessee could not furnish the requisite details. It was contended that before rejecting the application, the learned CIT(Exemptions) ought to have afforded another effective opportunity of hearing. It was further submitted that the rejection has resulted solely from an alleged procedural default and not from any adverse finding

4 ITA No. 3773/Mum/2026 Shree Pushkar Foundation regarding the charitable nature of the objects or the genuineness of the activities of the assessee. The learned AR, therefore, prayed that the impugned order be set aside and the matter be restored to the file of the learned CIT(Exemptions) with a direction to provide an effective opportunity of hearing and thereafter adjudicate the application afresh in accordance with law. 6. The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the findings recorded in the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(Exemptions). However, he fairly submitted that if the Bench is inclined to restore the matter, he has no objection to the matter being remanded to the file of the learned CIT(Exemptions) for fresh adjudication after granting adequate opportunity to the assessee. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is an undisputed position that the impugned order dated 01.03.2026 has been passed rejecting the assessee's application for renewal of registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) primarily on the ground that the assessee did not comply with the notice dated 30.01.2026 issued under the proceedings for verification of its application. The impugned order does not record any finding on the merits of the assessee's charitable objects or on the genuineness of its activities. The rejection is founded exclusively on the alleged non-compliance with the notice issued by the learned CIT(Exemptions).

5 ITA No. 3773/Mum/2026 Shree Pushkar Foundation 8. The assessee has consistently pleaded before us that the notice was not received on its registered e-mail address and, therefore, it was deprived of an effective opportunity to place the requisite material before the learned CIT(Exemptions). The learned Departmental Representative, though supporting the impugned order, has not objected to the matter being restored to the file of the learned CIT(Exemptions) for fresh consideration. 9. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, and in the interest of substantial justice, we are of the considered view that one more effective opportunity deserves to be afforded to the assessee to substantiate its claim for renewal of registration. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim of the assessee, we set aside the impugned order dated 01.03.2026 passed by the learned CIT(Exemptions) and restore the matter to his file with a direction to provide a reasonable and effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee, consider all the documents and explanations that may be furnished, examine the application in accordance with the provisions of section 12AB of the Act and thereafter pass a fresh speaking order in accordance with law. The assessee is also directed to extend full cooperation and furnish all the information and documents that may be called for during the remand proceedings. 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

6 ITA No. 3773/Mum/2026 Shree Pushkar Foundation Order pronounced in the open court on 30.06.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) (MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 30/06/2026 Dhananjay, Sr.PS आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथी / The Appellant 1. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 2. 3. संबंधधत आयकर आयुक्त / The CIT(A) आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / Concerned CIT 4. धिभागीय प्रधतधनधध, आयकर अपीलीय अधधकरण, मुम्बई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. 6. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, सत्याधपत प्रधत //True Copy// 1. उि/सहायक िंजीकार ( Asst. Registrar) आयकर अिीिीय अतिकरण, मुम्बई / ITAT, Mumbai