BAPESARA MOHALLA SIPAHI,BHAVNAGAR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1348/AHD/2026Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 May 20263 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that rejecting the application after only one opportunity was against natural justice. Therefore, the matter was set aside to the CIT(E) to allow another opportunity for the assessee to be heard and provide necessary documents.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an application for trust registration under Section 12AB(1)(b)(ii). The CIT(E) rejected the application and cancelled provisional registration due to non-compliance by the assessee. The assessee argued they missed the opportunity due to unfamiliarity with online procedures.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the trust registration application without providing adequate opportunities for compliance. Whether the principles of natural justice were violated by allowing only one opportunity.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kumar P Gohil, AR
For Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT-DR
Hearing: 20.05.2026Pronounced: 21.05.2026

PER NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad, [in short “CIT(E)”], dated 07.03.2026 in the proceeding u/s 12A of the Income Tax Act [hereinafter referred 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 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 compliance was made by

ITA No. 1348/Ahd/2026 Bapesara Mohalla Sipahi Vs. CIT(E) 2 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 Ld. CIT(E) has erred in law and on facts of the case in passing the impugned order without giving proper attention on documents submitted/available with Income Tax Portal Like ITRs and Forms. 2. Ld CIT(E) has erred in law and on facts of the case in rejecting the provisional registration of the appellant u/s. 12A of the Act. 3. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or withdraw any of the grounds of appeal at or before the time of hearing.

4.

Shri Manoj Kumar P Gohil, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) had allowed only one opportunity on 04.12.2025. 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 Shramdeep Sinha, 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 Act. In the present proceeding the Ld. CIT(E) had allowed only one

ITA No. 1348/Ahd/2026 Bapesara Mohalla Sipahi Vs. CIT(E)

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. In the interest of justice, we, therefore, deem it proper to set aside the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(E) with a 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 him.

7.

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

Order pronounced in the Court on 21/05/2026 at Ahmedabad.

Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated – 21st May, 2026 Neelesh, Sr. P.S (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 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 →