DEDICATED BROTHERS GROUP REGD,PATIALA,PUNJAB vs. CIT(E), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

ITA 1091/CHANDI/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 October 2026AY 2027-282 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What were the facts?

The assessee, Dedicated Brothers Group, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh, challenging the rejection order dated 16.03.2026 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chandigarh (CIT(E)). The CIT(E) had rejected the assessee's application for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Income Tax Act. The reason for rejection, as stated in paragraph 5 of the impugned order, was the assessee's failure to furnish the requisite documents as requested by the CIT(E). The assessee contended that all necessary documents were available and prayed for the matter to be remanded.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal accepted the assessee's prayer for remand. The reasoning was based on the assertion by the assessee's AR that all requisite documents were available. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(E) and restored the matter of registration back to the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh consideration. The Tribunal directed the assessee to supply the requisite documents and substantiate its registration application. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the rejection of the assessee's application for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) by the Ld. CIT(E) was justified on the grounds of non-furnishing of requisite documents? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that all the necessary documents to substantiate its registration application are available with it and prayed for the matter to be remanded back to the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh consideration. The assessee's Authorized Representative (AR) made this assertion. Revenue's Contention: The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Departmental Representative) opposed the prayer for remand.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, CHANDIGARH

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM & HON’BLE SHRI RAJESH DAMODARLAL SHARMA, JM

Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

1.

Aggrieved by rejection of an application as filed by the assessee seeking registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) vide rejection order dated 16.03.2026 of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chandigarh, [CIT(E)], the assessee is in further appeal before us. Upon perusal of para 5 of the impugned order, it could be seen that the registration has been denied on the ground that the assessee failed to furnish the requisite documents as called for b

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii)

All 669 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →