DEONAR BONGIYA PARISHAD,MUMBAI vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI
IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH,
MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
&
SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Deonar BongiyaParishad
Kali Temple Premises, Near
Sarnath
Building,
Anushakti Nagar, Mumbai
–400094, Maharashtra v/s.
बनाम
Commissioner of Income Tax
(Exemptions), Room No. 601,
6th
Floor,
Cumballa
Hill,
MTNL TE Building, Peddar
Road, Dr. Gopalrao Deshmukh
Marg, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai
– 400026, Maharashtra
स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAATD9840R
Appellant/अपीलार्थी
..
Respondent/प्रतिवादी
Appellant by :
Shri Nitin Khinchi,AR
Respondent by :
Shri Uma Shankar Prasad, (CIT DR)
Date of Hearing
26.06.2025
Date of Pronouncement
02.07.2025
आदेश / O R D E R
PER PRABHASH SHANKAR [A.M.] :-
The present appeal arising from the order dated 28.03.2025 is filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Learned
Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions), Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(E)”] pertaining to the order passed u/s. 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “Act”] for the Assessment Year [A.Y.] 2025-26. P a g e | 2
A.Y. 2025-26
Deonar Bongiya Parishad Mumbai
The grounds of appeal are as under: a. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(Exemptions), Mumbai erred in rejecting the application for grant of registration u/s.12A(1)(ac)(ii) in Form 10AB of the Appellant trust in summary manner on the pretext that the genuineness of activities of the trust and compliance of other law for the purposes of achieving objects of the trust are not established by the Appellant. b. The Ld. CIT(Exemptions), Mumbai failed to appreciate that the Appellant has furnished documents, sufficient materials and explanation to establish genuineness of activities of the trust and compliance of other law for the purposes of achieving its objects. c. In reaching to the conclusion and rejecting the application for grant of registration u/s.12A(1)(ac)(ii), the Ld. CIT (Exemptions), Mumbai omitted to consider relevant factors, considerations, principles and evidences while he was overwhelmed, influenced and prejudiced by irrelevant considerations and factors. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee Trust had made an application in Form no.10AB under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act for registration u/s 12AB. The ld.CIT(E) on verification of application noticed that it was incomplete as all the relevant documents were not found accompanying it. Though certain details were submitted, there was no response in connection with further queries. It is observed that the applicant failed to submit proof of activities and expenses incurred by the trust. Consequently, in the absence of further details requisitioned he proceeded to reject the application for registration. 4. It may be stated here before us the ld.AR submitted that the trust was denied adequate opportunity of hearing by the ld.CIT(E). We notice that the ld.CIT(E) rejected the application solely on the ground of P a g e | 3 A.Y. 2025-26
Deonar Bongiya Parishad Mumbai non furnishing of relevant details. He did not adjudicate the issues involved. However, it is equally true that it is the fundamental duty of the assessee to diligently pursue the proceedings and comply with the notices and proceedings initiated by the Revenue authorities. Despite notices issued by the CIT(E), no substantive explanation was submitted.
In the present case, despite receiving adequate opportunities, the assessee displayed a casual approach and indifference.
5. However, we are of the considered view that the scales of justice demand that the matter should be verified and revisited at the level of ld. CIT(E) and accordingly, the Bench proposed that the matter be remanded back to him for de novo adjudication by while applying the principles of natural justice and affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Both the sides agreed to this proposition.
Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and remand it back to him for fresh adjudication.
6. In the result, appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 02.07.2025. PAWAN SINGH
PRABHASH SHANKAR
(न्याययक सदस्य /JUDICIAL MEMBER)
(लेखाकार सदस्य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)
P a g e | 4
A.Y. 2025-26
Deonar Bongiya Parishad Mumbai
Place: म ुंबई/Mumbai
ददनाुंक /Date 02.07.2025
Lubhna Shaikh / Steno
आदेश की प्रयियलयि अग्रेयिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant
2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent.
3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT
4. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण DR, ITAT,
Mumbai
5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file.
सत्यावपि प्रवि ////
आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,
उि/सहायक िंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.