SHREE SWETAMBAER MURTIPUJAK JAIN SANGH,SURAT vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION), EXEMPTION WARD, SURAT, SURAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 615/SRT/2026Status: HeardITAT Surat12 June 2026AY 2026-274 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application by allowing only one opportunity for hearing. Principles of natural justice require a reasonable and effective opportunity.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust applied for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii). The CIT(E) rejected the application citing non-compliance and lack of genuineness of activities. The assessee argued that they were not granted a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of the registration application by the CIT(E) was justified without providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “DB” BENCH, SURAT

Before: SHRI TR SENTHIL KUMAR & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA

For Appellant: Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jain, CIT-DR
Hearing: 20.05.2026Pronounced: 12.06.2026

PER TR SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad, [in short “CIT(E)”], dated 08.03.2026 in the proceeding u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Income Tax Act.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed an application in Form No. 10AB for registration of Trust u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(E) had called for certain details from the assessee in order to examine the genuineness of the activities of the trust and to satisfy himself that the activities were in consonance with the objects of

ITA No. 609/Srt/2026 Dindu Maheshwari Vanik Public Charitable Trust Vs. CIT(E) the trust. As no compliance was made by the assessee, the Ld. CIT(E) had rejected the application of the assessee vide the impugned order and the provisional registration granted earlier was also cancelled.

3.

Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(E), the assessee is in appeal before us. The following grounds have been taken in this appeal:

1.

On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the Ld. CIT(E) has erred in rejecting the application made by the assessee trust without granting reasonable opportunity of hearing. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the Ld. CIT(E) has erred in not granting permanent registration to the assessee trust by rejecting the application filed in Form No. 10AB us/. 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the IT Act 1961 & further erred in cancelling the provisional registration granted to assesse. 3. It is therefore, prayed that order of Ld. CIT(E) rejecting application of assesse may please be quashed. 4. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of the appeal.

4.

Shri Sapnesh Sheth, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that Ld. CIT(E) had allowed only one opportunity of hearing on 21.02.2026. The Ld. Sr. Counsel explained that the Ld. CIT(E) had passed the order without taking into account the substantial details and documents and 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, supported the order of 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.

ITA No. 609/Srt/2026 Dindu Maheshwari Vanik Public Charitable Trust Vs. CIT(E) 6. 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 section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 came to be rejected by the Ld. CIT(E) primarily on account of non- compliance with the notice issued seeking certain documents and clarifications. From the records, it is evident that only one effective opportunity was granted to the assessee. The interest of natural justice cannot be served by rejecting the application of the assessee by allowing only one opportunity. Though the Ld. CIT(E) has mentioned in the order that notices were issued from time of time, we don’t find reference of any notice other than the notice dated 21.02.2026. Considering that the assessee is a charitable trust seeking registration under the provisions of the Act and that the issue relates to the examination of its objects and activities, we are of the considered view that one more opportunity deserves to be afforded to the assessee to place the requisite material before the Ld. CIT(E). The principles of natural justice require that a reasonable and effective opportunity of being heard be granted before an adverse decision is taken. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the application, we deem it appropriate, in the interest of justice, to set aside the impugned order 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 proceedings. The Ld. CIT(E) shall afford adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and thereafter pass a speaking order in accordance with law. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for de novo consideration. The grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

ITA No. 609/Srt/2026 Dindu Maheshwari Vanik Public Charitable Trust Vs. CIT(E)

7.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the Court on 12/06/2026 at Ahmedabad.

Sd/- Sd/- (NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA) (TR SENTHIL KUMAR) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated – 12th June, 2026 (True Copy) आदेश आदेश क� आदेश आदेश क� क� �ितिलिप क� �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अ�ेिषत 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A) 5. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण / DR, ITAT, 6. गाड� फाईल /Guard file. आदेशानुसार/BY ORDER, आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) उप उप/सहायक उप उप सहायक सहायक पंजीकार सहायक पंजीकार पंजीकार आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद अिधकरण अहमदाबाद अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad अहमदाबाद

More judgments on Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii)

All 679 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →