SRI MEWADA SUTHAR SEVA SAMAJ,HIMATNAGAR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1420/AHD/2026Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 June 20265 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the rejection was primarily due to a lack of supporting documentary evidence and that the assessee deserved another opportunity to present its case. The impugned orders were set aside, and the matter was restored to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust applied for registration under Section 12AB and 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) rejected the applications after providing only one opportunity for hearing and without adequate response from the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of registration under Section 12AB and 80G(5) was valid without granting adequate opportunity of hearing and proper examination of the assessee's claim.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 80G(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH

Before: Shri TR Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Bharat S. Shah, A.R
For Respondent: Shri Pruthviraj Meena, CIT-D.R

आदेश/ORDER

PER TR SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

These two appeals are filed by the Assessee Trust as against separate orders both dated 09.03.2026 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad (in short “Ld. CIT(E)”) denying registration under Section 12AB and 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) respectively.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed applications in Form No. 10AB seeking registration under

I.T.A Nos. 1420 & 1421/Ahd/2026 Shri Mewada Suthar Seva Samaj sections 12AB and 80G(5)(iii) of the Act. Ld. CIT(E) given single opportunity of hearing and the application filed for registration under section 12AB of the Act calling for the details of the activities and documents. However, the Assessee has not responded to the same which has resulted in passing an ex-parte order rejecting registration under section12AB of the Act as well as cancelling the provisional registration already granted by passing impugned order dated 09.03.2026. As far as application filed under section 80G(5) single opportunity was given on 19- 03-2026 to the Assessee Trust and the application for registration under section 80G(5) was also rejected on the sole ground 12AB registration also denied to the Assessee Trust.

3.

Aggrieved against the same Assessee Trust are in appeal before us raising the following Grounds of Appeal in ITA No. 1420/Ahd/2026:-

“1. Invalid rejection without proper opportunity. The Ld. CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application without granting adequate and effective opportunity of being heard, thereby violating principles of natural justice. 2. Rejection merely for technical non-compliance is illegal. The rejection solely on the ground of non-filing of documents, without examining existing records OR prior registration, is arbitrary and unsustainable. 3. Failure to consider earlier registration. The Ld. CIT(E) failed to appreciate that the appellant already held valid registration u/s 12A granted earlier after due verification. 4. No adverse finding on genuineness of activities. The Ld. CIT(E) has not brought any adverse material to demonstrate that: Activities are non-genuine, OR Not in accordance with objects 5. Violation of Section 12AB framework The scope under section 12AB is limited to examining: Objects of trust Genuineness of activities The rejection without such examination is ultra vires.

I.T.A Nos. 1420 & 1421/Ahd/2026 Shri Mewada Suthar Seva Samaj 6. Order passed without application of mind The Ld. CIT(E) passed a mechanical order merely due to alleged non-compliance, without independent verification. 7. Disproportionate action Cancellation/rejection leading to consequences under section 115TD is excessive and unjustified. 8. Prayer for restoration The appellant prays that: Registration u/s 12A be granted/restored Alternatively, matter be remanded for fresh consideration.” 4. The Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in ITA No. 1421/Ahd/2026 reads as under: -

“1. Rejection without adequate opportunity The order is bad in law as it is passed without providing proper opportunity of hearing. 2. Mechanical rejection without examining conditions of section 80G(5). The Ld. CIT(E) failed to examine whether statutory conditions were actually violated. 3. No finding of non-genuineness There is no adverse finding that activities are not genuine. 4. Failure to consider earlier approval The appellant already had valid approval u/s 80G which was granted after due satisfaction. 5. Violation of Rule 11AA principles The authority is required to examine compliance, not reject merely for procedural lapse. 6. Non-speaking order The impugned order lacks reasoning and does not deal with facts OR law. 7. Violation of natural justice The order is passed ex parte without proper adjudication. 8. Prayer The appellant prays that: Approval u/s. 80G be granted/restored. Alternatively, matter be remanded.”

5.

Shri Bharat S. Shah, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee had furnished all details along with the application in Form No. 10AB before the Ld. CIT(E). He submitted that the assessee is in a position to furnish all other

I.T.A Nos. 1420 & 1421/Ahd/2026 Shri Mewada Suthar Seva Samaj requisite details and documentary evidences to substantiate its claim and satisfy the conditions prescribed under sections12AB and 80G(5)(iii) of the Act. He, therefore, prayed that the impugned order be set aside and the matter be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.

6.

Per contra, Pruthviraj Meena, the Ld. CIT-DR, supported the orders passed by Ld. CIT(E). He, however, had no objection if the matter was set aside the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for allowing another opportunity to the Assessee Trust.

7.

We have carefully considered the facts of the case and the material available on record. It is observed that the application of the assessee-trust for registration under section12AB of the Act came to be rejected by the Ld. CIT(E) on the ground that the assessee failed to furnish supporting documentary evidences to establish fulfillment of the conditions prescribed under the said provision. Before us, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is ready and willing to furnish all the relevant details and evidences required for verification of its claim. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view that the rejection has been made primarily for want of supporting documentary evidence and only one opportunity of hearing given to the Assessee Trust. We are of the considered view that one more opportunity deserves to be granted to the Assessee Trust to place all relevant material before the Ld. CIT(E). Therefore, in the interest of substantial justice and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim of the assessee, we deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned orders and restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. The assessee shall furnish all the documents, explanations and evidences as may be called for by the Ld. CIT(E) and shall fully cooperate in the registration proceedings. The Ld. CIT(E) shall 4

I.T.A Nos. 1420 & 1421/Ahd/2026 Shri Mewada Suthar Seva Samaj afford adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and thereafter pass a speaking order in accordance with law. Accordingly, the impugned orders are set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for de novo consideration. The ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

8.

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 12-06-2026

Sd/- Sd/- (NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA) (TR SENTHIL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 12/06/2026 a.k. आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद

More judgments on Section 12AB

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →