SUBHADRABEN PRATAPSINH CHARITABLE TRUST,MITHAKHALI SIX ROAD, ELLISBRIDGE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, AHMEDABAD

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.998/Ahd/2026 (Assessment Year: N.A.) Subhadraben Pratapsinh Vs. Income Tax Officer, Charitable Trust, Circle-1 (Exemption), 705/706, Aditaya, Mithakhali Ahmedabad Six Road, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006 [PAN No.AAETS3301G] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) None Appellant by : Respondent by: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT DR Date of Hearing 06.05.2026 08.05.2026 Date of Pronouncement O R D E R PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), (in short “Ld. CIT(E)”), Ahmedabad vide order dated 09.03.2026.

“1. The learned CIT (Exemption), Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in rejecting the application for registration under section 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. The learned CIT (Exemption) has erred in passing the impugned order without properly appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The learned CIT (Exemption) has erred in rejecting the application solely on the basis of alleged non-submission of details without examining the objects and genuineness of activities of the appellant trust as mandated under section 12AB.

ITA No. 998/Ahd/2026 Subhadraben Pratapsinh Charitable Trust vs. ITO(E) Asst. Year –N.A. - 2– 4. The learned CIT (Exemption) has failed to discharge the statutory duty cast upon him under section 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 to satisfy himself about the objects and genuineness of the activities of the trust. 5. The learned CIT (Exemption) has erred in passing the order in violation of the principles of natural justice by not providing adequate and effective opportunity of being heard. 6. The learned CIT (Exemption) has passed a non-speaking and mechanical order without application of mind and without recording proper reasons. 7. The learned CIT (Exemption) has erred in not issuing a final show cause notice before passing the adverse order. 8. The learned CIT (Exemption) has erred in law in rejecting the application on technical grounds which is contrary to settled legal principles. 9. The appellant submits that the trust is engaged in genuine charitable activities and is eligible for registration under section 12AB of the Act. 10. The learned CIT (Exemption) has erred in not considering that procedural lapses or technical defaults should not result in denial of substantive benefit. 11. The learned CIT (Exemption) has failed to consider judicial precedents which mandate that registration cannot be denied merely on technical grounds. 12. At the stage of registration under Section 12AB, the scope of enquiry is limited to examining the objects and prima facie genuineness. The impugned order does not record any dissatisfaction on these aspects and is therefore unsustainable. 13. The appellant prays that the impugned order may kindly be set aside and the matter be restored to the file of the learned CIT (Exemption) for fresh consideration. 14. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, or withdraw any or all of the above grounds of appeal.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee trust namely SUBHADRABEN PRATAPSINH CHARITABLE TRUST filed an application in Form No. 10AB seeking registration under section 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") before the learned CIT (Exemption), Ahmedabad. The learned CIT (Exemption) observed that notices were issued from time to time calling upon the assessee to furnish requisite details and

ITA No. 998/Ahd/2026 Subhadraben Pratapsinh Charitable Trust vs. ITO(E) Asst. Year –N.A. - 3– documents in support of its application. However, according to the learned CIT (Exemption), no submissions, documentary evidences or adjournment applications were filed by the assessee in response to such notices. The learned CIT (Exemption) further observed that the assessee failed to furnish documents prescribed under Rule 17A(2) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 and other details necessary to satisfy himself regarding the genuineness of the activities of the trust, whether the activities were in consonance with the objects of the trust, and whether other laws material for achieving the objects were complied with. Accordingly, the learned CIT (Exemption), vide order dated 09.03.2026 passed under section 12AB of the Act, rejected the application filed in Form No. 10AB and also cancelled the provisional registration, if any, granted earlier.

ITA No. 998/Ahd/2026 Subhadraben Pratapsinh Charitable Trust vs. ITO(E) Asst. Year –N.A. - 4– recording any adverse finding regarding the charitable objects or genuineness of activities of the trust. It was further submitted that the assessee is engaged in genuine charitable activities and is now ready to furnish all necessary documents and evidences in support of its application. Accordingly, it was prayed that the matter may be restored to the file of the learned CIT (Exemption) for fresh adjudication after granting reasonable opportunity of hearing.

ITA No. 998/Ahd/2026 Subhadraben Pratapsinh Charitable Trust vs. ITO(E) Asst. Year –N.A. - 5–

be called for by the learned CIT (Exemption). We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the assessee and all issues are left open for adjudication afresh.

Sd/- Sd/- (NARENDRA P. SINHA) (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 08/05/2026 TANMAY, Sr. PS TRUE COPY आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 1. 2. ��थ� / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad