SHREE BHAKT JALARAM MANDIR TRUST,NA vs. ARIVS.CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 600/SRT/2026Status: HeardITAT Surat12 June 20263 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, setting aside the CIT(E)'s order. The assessee was granted another opportunity to present their case before the CIT(E).

What were the facts?

The assessee trust applied for registration under Section 12AB(1)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) rejected the application due to non-compliance with a request for details to examine the genuineness of the trust's activities.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of registration under Section 12AB was justified due to non-compliance, and if the assessee should be granted another opportunity to be heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB(1)(b)(ii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT BENCH, SURAT

Before: SHRI T. R. SENTHIL KUMAR & SHRI NARENDRA PRSAD SINHA

For Appellant: Shri Sujesh C. Suratwala, CA
For Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jain, CIT-DR
Hearing: 20/05/2026Pronounced: 12/06/2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT (Conducted through E-Court at Ahmedabad) BEFORE SHRI T. R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI NARENDRA PRSAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.600/SRT/2026 (Assessment Year: N.A.) Shree Bhakt Jalaram Vs. Commissioner of Income Mandir Trust, Tax (Exemption), Jalaram Mandir Ahmedabad Kaliawadi, Navsari-396427 [PAN No.AACTS8227K] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Sujesh C. Suratwala, CA Respondent by : Shri Mukesh Jain, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 20/05/2026 Date of Pronouncement 12/06/2026 O R D E R PER T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the order dated 08.03.2026 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad (in short “Ld. CIT(E)”) denying registration under section 12AB(1)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed an application for registration of the Trust u/s. 12AB(1)(b)(ii) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(E) had called for certain details on 22.02.2026 to examine the genuineness of the activities of the trust and to satisfy himself that the activities were in consonance with the objects of the trust. As no

- 2 - ITA No.600/Srt/2026 A.Y. N.A. compliance was made by the assessee, the Ld. CIT(E) had rejected the application of the assessee vide the impugned order dated 08.03.2026 and the provisional registration granted earlier was also cancelled.

3.

Aggrieved with the rejection order, the assessee is in appeal before us raising the following Grounds of Appeal:

“1. Violation of Principles of Natural Justice and Invalid Service of Notice. 2. Non-consideration of Evidence and Mechanical Conclusion on Genuineness of Activities. 3. Illegal and Without Jurisdiction Cancellation of Provisional Registration. 4. Erroneous Presumption Regarding Non-Compliance with Other Laws. 5. Premature and Unwarranted Direction under Section115TD.” 4. Shri Sujesh C. Suratwala, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) had allowed only one opportunity on 22.02.2026. The notice was sent on the e-mail but the trustees of the assessee trust were not regular in accessing the e-mail account. Further, they were not conversant with the procedural requirement for filing details online, and as a result no compliance could be made before the Ld. CIT(E). The Ld. AR requested that the assessee may be allowed another opportunity of being heard by setting aside the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E).

5.

Per contra, Shri Mukesh Jain, the Ld. CIT-DR, had no objection if the matter was set aside to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for allowing another opportunity to the assessee.

6.

We have considered the request of the assessee. The present application was filed for registration of the trust u/s 12AB(1)(b)(ii) of the

- 3 - ITA No.600/Srt/2026 A.Y. N.A. Act. The Ld. CIT(E) had allowed only one opportunity to the assessee for furnishing certain details and thereafter the application of the assessee was rejected. The interest of natural justice cannot be served by rejecting the application by allowing only one opportunity. Therefore, in the interest Principle of Natural Justice, we, therefore, deem it proper to set aside the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(E) with direction to allow another opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to make compliance before the Ld. CIT(E) and produce the documents and evidences as required by the Trust.

7.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced under proviso of Rule 34(4) of ITAT Rules, 1963 on 12.06.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (NARENDRA P. SINHA) (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad, dated 12/06/2026 Tanmay, Sr. PS TRUE COPY आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��थ� / The Respondent संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / Concerned CIT 3. 4. आयकर आयु� अपील / The CIT(A)- ( ) 5. िवभागीय �ितिनिध आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण राजोकट/DR,ITAT, Ahmedabad, , , 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, राजोकट / ITAT, Surat

More judgments on Section 12AB(1)(b)(ii)

All 150 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB(1)(b)(ii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →