DHAMMAARAVALLIVIPASSANA KENDRA,MODASA vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION(AHMEDABAD), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2715/AHD/2026Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 October 20264 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Ld. CIT(E) had issued only one notice, and the assessee failed to furnish the required details. Considering the explanation provided by the assessee's representative regarding the circumstances leading to non-compliance, the Tribunal was of the view that the application should not have been rejected without affording the assessee a further opportunity to submit the necessary information and documents. Accordingly, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and restored the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh consideration. The Ld. CIT(E) was directed to grant the assessee one more opportunity to furnish the requisite details and documents and then adjudicate the application afresh. The assessee was also directed to cooperate and ensure timely compliance. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Dhamma Aravalli Vipassana Kendra, filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) [CIT(E)], Ahmedabad, dated 08.03.2026, which rejected its application for registration under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, filed in Form No. 10AB. The appeal was filed with a delay of 61 days, which the Tribunal condoned. The CIT(E) had rejected the application because the assessee failed to provide certain details and documents requested to verify the genuineness and conformity of the Trust's activities with its objects. The assessee's representative explained that a trustee inadvertently failed to forward the notice to the accountant due to personal difficulties, leading to non-compliance.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) erred in rejecting the application filed under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, without affording the Appellant an adequate and effective opportunity of being heard, thereby violating the principles of natural justice? 2. Whether the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) erred in rejecting the application for want of documentary evidence, without appreciating that the Appellant was prevented by sufficient and bona fide cause from furnishing the details and documents called for? Assessee's Contentions: The assessee argued that the notice was received, but due to a trustee's personal difficulties, it was not forwarded to the accountant, resulting in non-compliance. The assessee requested the matter be restored to the CIT(E) to provide the requisite details and documents and to substantiate its claim for registration. Revenue's Contentions: 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.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA & SHRI SANJAY KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Jignesh Shah, AR
For Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT-DR
Hearing: 24.09.2026Pronounced: 13.10.2026

PER NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(E)”] dated 08.03.2026 in the proceeding u/s 12A of the Income Tax Act [hereinafter referred as “the Act”].

2.

There was a delay of 61 days in filing of this appeal. It has been submitted that the matter was entrusted to the accountant to file the appeal in consultation with the chartered accountant. However, there was delay of 61 days in filing of the appeal due to lapse on the part of the

ITA No. 2715/Ahd/2026 Dhammaaravallivipassana Kendra Vs CIT(E), A.Y - NA 2

accountant. It has been submitted that the delay in filing of the appeal was neither intentional nor deliberate. Considering the explanation of the assessee, the delay in filing of the appeal is condoned.

3.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed an application in Form No. 10AB for registration of the Trust u/s. 12A of the Act. The Ld. CIT(E) had called for certain details in order to verify the genuineness of the activities of the Trust and also to verify that the activities were in consonance with the objects of the Trust. However, no compliance was made by the assessee and, therefore, the Ld. CIT(E) had rejected the application of the assessee vide the impugned order.

4.

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.

The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad erred in law and on facts in rejecting the application filed by the Appellant in Form No. 10AB under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and in cancelling the provisional registration, without affording the Appellant an adequate and effective opportunity of being heard, and thereby passing the order in violation of the principles of natural justice 2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad erred in law and on facts in rejecting the application for want of documentary evidence, without appreciating that the Appellant was prevented by sufficient and bona fide cause from furnishing the details and documents called for, and the impugned order therefore deserves to be set aside and the matter restored to the file of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) for de novo adjudication on merits after affording the Appellant a reasonable opportunity of being heard and of furnishing the requisite details and documents 3. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, modify and/or withdraw any of the grounds of appeal at or before the time of hearing

ITA No. 2715/Ahd/2026 Dhammaaravallivipassana Kendra Vs CIT(E), A.Y - NA 3 5. Shri Jignesh Shah, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the notice issued by the learned CIT(E) had been duly received by the Trust. However, Shri Jayram Chandra Kant Soni, one of the trustees, owing to personal difficulties, inadvertently failed to forward the notice to the concerned accountant, resulting in non-compliance. The learned AR, therefore, requested that the matter be restored to the file of the learned CIT(E) to enable the assessee to furnish the requisite details and documents and to provide an opportunity to substantiate its claim for registration.

6.

Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, the Ld. CIT-DR, has no objection if the matter was set aside to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for allowing another opportunity to the assessee.

7.

We have considered the submissions of the learned AR and perused the material available on record. It is evident that the learned CIT(E) had issued only one notice dated 22.02.2026, in response to which the assessee failed to furnish the requisite details. Having regard to the circumstances explained by the learned AR, we are of the view that the application ought not to have been rejected without affording the assessee a further opportunity to furnish the required information and documents. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of the learned CIT(E) for fresh consideration. The learned CIT(E) is directed to afford the assessee one more opportunity to furnish the requisite details and documents and thereafter adjudicate the application afresh in accordance with law. The assessee is also directed to extend full cooperation and ensure timely compliance with the notices issued during the course of the set-aside proceeding.

ITA No. 2715/Ahd/2026 Dhammaaravallivipassana Kendra Vs CIT(E), A.Y - NA 4

8.

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

Order pronounced in the Court on 13/10/2026 at Ahmedabad.

Sd/- Sd/- (SANJAY KUMAR) (NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated – 13th October, 2026 Neelesh, Sr. PS (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 12A

All 6,064 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →