ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF ST STEPHEN ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME EXEMPTIONS MUMBAI , MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6028/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 September 2026AY 2025-266 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(E) rejected the application without providing a proper and meaningful opportunity to the assessee to furnish required details. Therefore, the case was remanded back to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a charitable institution, applied for renewal of registration under Section 12AB. The CIT(E) rejected the application after issuing one notice for documents, which the assessee failed to fully comply with due to staff issues.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of registration renewal application without providing a sufficient opportunity to the assessee to furnish documents is justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD & SHRI RAKESH KUMAR LODHA

For Appellant: Shri Mandar Vaidya
For Respondent: Shri Sandeep Lakra CIT
Hearing: 04.09.2026Pronounced: 24.09.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER And SHRI RAKESH KUMAR LODHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.6028/MUM/2026 ROMAN CATHOLIC COMMISSIONER OF CHURCH OF THE ST INCOME TAX STEPHEN (EXEMPTIONS) 601, 6th Floor, Cumballa Hill 1, L.J. Marg, MTNL TE Building, Pedder Cumballa Hill Vs. Road, Dr GD Marg, Mumbai Mumbai – 400 036 – 400 026 Maharasthra Maharasthra

PAN- AABTS9589D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Shri Mandar Vaidya Revenue Represented by : Shri Sandeep Lakra CIT DR. Date of Hearing : 04.09.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 24.09.2026

ITA NO.6028 M 2026 ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF ST STEPHEN O R D E R PER : Shri Rakesh Kumar Lodha, Accountant Member: This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 04-03-2026, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) [in short ‘Ld.CIT(E)] u/s 12AB(I)(B)(II) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) against rejection of application for renewal of registration u/s 12AB of the Act.

2.

The Assessee raised following grounds of appeal, before the Tribunal : 1. The Ld. CIT (Exemptions) erred in passing order u/s. 12AA denying registration to the appellant u/s. 12AB of the Income Tax Act, without specifying the conditions that were not complied with, by the Appellant/assessee. 2. The Ld. CIT (Exemptions) was not justified in denying registration without putting the assessee to notice, as to what details were required to be filed by the Assessee with the Ld. CIT(E). 3. The Ld. CIT (Exemptions) misdirected himself in not specifying the details not filed by the assessee. 4. The Appellant craves leave to add/modify any grounds of appeal. 3. The brief facts of the case are that assessee is a charitable institution and filed an application dated 30.09.2025 for renewal of registration under section 12AB of the Act. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), vide notice dated 18.01.2026 sought complete set of documents/details as required under Rule 17A(2).

ITA NO.6028 M 2026 ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF ST STEPHEN However, the assessee failed to comply with said notice, so, the application is rejected vide an order dated 04-03-2026.

4.

Aggrieved by rejection order, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal, and submitted that Ld. CIT(E) has not provided proper and meaningful opportunity, except once, to furnish the requite details in support its application. However, fairly admitted its fault for not filed relevant documents in compliance to notice dated 18-01-2026, it was due to staff problems. Now urged that there are several orders of Hon’ble Benches of Tribunal, wherein, for similar facts and rejection of application by providing one opportunity, were sent back to Ld. CIT(E) for reconsideration.

5.

Also stated that facts of the present are squarely covered by the relied upon case law compilation furnished by the assessee and request for sending back to Ld. CIT(E). The assessee relied upon order of Co-ordinate Bench “D:, Mumbai, ITAT in case of Resource & support Center for Development vs CIT(E), ITA no. 5731/MUM/2026 & 5752/MUM/2026, dated 05-08-2026, the finding are as under : “4. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The power conferred upon the learned CIT(E) while considering an application for registration or renewal under section 12AB necessarily requires him to examine the objects of the trust, the genuineness

ITA NO.6028 M 2026 ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF ST STEPHEN of its activities and such other statutory requirements as are contemplated under the Act. Such an exercise necessarily presupposes due consideration of the material placed on record as well as an effective opportunity to the applicant to explain or furnish any further particulars that may be required for arriving at a proper satisfaction. In the present case, the impugned order proceeds substantially on the premise that the assessee had not complied with all the requirements contained in the notice issued by the learned CIT(E). However, no discussion has been made with regard to the nature of the documents allegedly not furnished or as to why the material available on record was insufficient for examining the assessee’s eligibility. Having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would be adequately served if the matter is restored to the file of the learned CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. We accordingly set aside the impugned order and restore the issue to the file of the learned CIT(E) with a direction to examine the assessee’s application afresh, consider all documents and explanations that may be furnished by the assessee, and thereafter pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law after granting due and effective opportunity of hearing. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the assessee’s claim and all issues are left open for fresh consideration. 5. The assessee is also directed to extend full cooperation in the fresh proceedings and furnish all such documents, records and explanations as may be called for by the learned CIT(E), who shall thereafter decide the application independently and strictly in accordance with law. Subject to these observations, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.5732/Mum/2026 is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.”

6.

Per Contra ld CIT, DR relied upon the order of ld CIT(E). 7. We have given thoughtful consideration to the peculiar facts and circumstances, found that ld. CIT(E) has afforded an opportunity to

ITA NO.6028 M 2026 ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF ST STEPHEN furnish details/ documents to support its application, however, assessee failed to avail the same. Meanwhile, Ld. CIT(E) without providing another opportunity, and without issue of any SCN, rejected the applications. We, observed in totality for just and proper decision of the case and substantial justice, we deem it appropriate to remand the instant case to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for decision afresh, suffice it to say by affording an reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Assessee.

8.

The Assessee is directed to file the relevant documents afresh, before the Ld. Commissioner without any delay and default. We further clarify that in case of subsequent default, the Assessee shall not be entitled for any leniency.

9.

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 24.09.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD) (RAKESH KUMAR LODHA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Mumbai, Dated: 24.09.2026. Sharath, Private Secretary.

ITA NO.6028 M 2026 ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF ST STEPHEN

Copy to: The Appellant The Respondent The CIT, Concerned, Mumbai The DR Concerned Bench

//True Copy// By Order Dy/Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai.

More judgments on Section 12AB

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →