AIP REDDY MAHAJANASANGHA,MAHAGANAPATHI N, WEST OF CHORD RD BANGALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) BANGALORE , BANGALORE, KARNATAKA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 451/BANG/2026Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 May 2026AY 2027-284 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration, granting the assessee one more opportunity to furnish all necessary details and evidence to substantiate its claim for registration.

What were the facts?

The assessee applied for registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) rejected the application because the assessee failed to furnish complete details to establish the genuineness of its activities.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) was justified in rejecting the registration application without granting a sufficient opportunity to the assessee to furnish complete details.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, BANGALORE

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K

For Appellant: Shri Siddesh N Gaddi, CA
For Respondent: Shri N Balusamy, JCIT (DR)
Hearing: 06.05.2026Pronounced: 13.05.2026

PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

The present appeal, filed at the instance of the assessee, is directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [ Exemption] (hereafter- ld. CIT(E)) in Form No. 10AD rejecting the application of registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2.

The facts in brief are that the assessee filed Form 10AB for approval of registration under section 12AB of the Act. During the

ITA No.451/Bang/2026 Page 2 of 4

proceedings, the learned CIT(E) required the assessee to furnish necessary details to establish the genuineness of the activity of the trust. However, the assessee only provided partial details. Thus, the learned CIT(E) held that the assessee failed to discharge the onus cast upon it substantiating the genuineness of its activity and demonstrating its entitlement for approval under section 12AB of the Act. Hence, the learned CIT(E) rejected the assessee’s application.

3.

Being aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(E), the assessee is in appeal before us.

4.

The learned AR before us submitted that due to unforeseen circumstances, the assessee could not furnish complete details and supporting evidence before the learned CIT(E). It was further submitted that the assessee is now in possession of all the relevant documents and is ready to furnish the same if one more opportunity is granted. The learned AR therefore prayed that the matter may be restored to the file of the learned CIT(E) for fresh consideration in the interest of justice and fair play.

5.

The learned DR on the contrary raised no objection if the matter is restored back to the file of the learned CIT(E) for fresh consideration as per law.

6.

We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. We notice that the application of the assessee for registration under section 12AB of the Act came to be rejected mainly on account of non-furnishing of complete details and

ITA No.451/Bang/2026 Page 3 of 4

supporting evidences. At the same time, the assessee has submitted before us that it is now ready and willing to furnish all the relevant details and documents required for examining the genuineness of its activities.

6.1 In our considered opinion, the provisions relating to registration under section 12AB of the Act are beneficial provisions and the claim of the assessee should ordinarily be examined on merits after granting reasonable and effective opportunity. The principles of natural justice require that the assessee should be afforded one more opportunity to substantiate its claim for registration by furnishing all necessary details and evidence. Accordingly, in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(E) and restore the matter back to his file for fresh adjudication. The assessee is directed to furnish all the requisite details, documents and evidence as may be called for by the learned CIT(E). The learned CIT(E) shall thereafter examine the application of the assessee afresh in accordance with law and decide the issue by passing a speaking order after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee as per law. Accordingly, the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in court on 13th day of May, 2026 Sd/- Sd/- (SOUNDARARAJAN K) (WASEEM AHMED) Judicial Member Accountant Member Bangalore Dated, 13th May, 2026 / vms /

ITA No.451/Bang/2026 Page 4 of 4

Copy to: 1. The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 6. Guard file By order Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore

More judgments on Section 12AB

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →