SWAMI AATMANAND SEVA TRUST,SURAT vs. CIT(EXMP.), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 696/SRT/2026Status: HeardITAT Surat12 June 20265 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee should be granted one more opportunity to present its case and documents to the CIT(E). The impugned orders were set aside, and the matter was restored for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust applied for registration under sections 12AB and 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) rejected the 12AB application after giving one opportunity for hearing, citing non-response from the assessee. The 80G(5) application was rejected solely based on the 12AB rejection without a separate hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of registration under Section 12AB and 80G(5) was justified without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee. Whether the assessee was denied natural justice.

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, SURAT BENCH, SURAT

Before: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Ms. Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri P M Jagasheth, A.R
For Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jain, CIT-D.R

आदेश/ORDER

PER T.R. 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 sections 12AB and 80G(5)(ii) 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) no opportunity was given 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. 695/Srt/2026:

“1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of the Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad has erred in rejecting Application for grant of registration of trust u/s. 12A(1)(ac) (ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the provisional approval u/s. 12A(1)(ac) (ii) granted earlier has also been cancelled. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of the Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad has erred in not granting adequate opportunity to hear and passed the order, hence, the principal of natural justice is not abided. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the appellant Trust is qualifying for registration u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. It is therefore prayed that the CIT(Exemption) should be directed passed u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, may please be set aside to the file of the CIT(Exemption) with appropriate direction. 5. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of the hearing of the appeal.”

4.

The Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in ITA No.696/Srt/2026 reads as under: -

“1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of the Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad has erred in rejecting Application for registration U/s.80G(5)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2.

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of the Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad has erred in not granting adequate opportunity to hear and passed the order, hence, the principal of natural justice is not abide.

3.

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the appellant Trust is qualifying for registration u/s. 80G(5) (ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

4.

It is therefore prayed that the CIT(Exemption) should be directed passed u/s. 80G(5)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, may please be set aside to the file of the CIT(Exemption) with appropriate direction.

5.

Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of the hearing of the appeal.”

5.

Shri P M Jagasheth, 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 requisite details and documentary evidences to substantiate its claim and satisfy the conditions prescribed under sections12AB and 80G(5)(ii) 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, Shri Mukesh Jain, 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. 3

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 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) (T.R. 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, Surat 6. Guard file. By order, Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Surat

More judgments on Section 12AB

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →