Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a charitable trust, applied for registration under Sections 12A and 80G of the Income Tax Act. The application for Section 12A was initially rejected due to an incorrect section mentioned but is now pending after correction. The CIT(E) rejected the Section 80G application citing lack of sufficient documentary evidence and activity notes.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the assessee's 12A application was pending and that they had collated evidence for the 80G application. Considering principles of natural justice, the Tribunal granted the assessee another opportunity.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to furnish evidence for registration under Section 80G, especially when the Section 12A registration is also pending.
Sections Cited
12A, 80G
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JM &
(Assessment Year: 2025-26) SYF Foundation, CIT (Exemption), 2nd Floor, Rani Mansion, Through Mr. Abhijit Avinash Joshi (Managing Trustee), A311 Kasturi Kalyan, Murbad Road, Vs. Plaza CHSL, Manpada Road, Kalyan, Maharashtra-421301 Dombivli East, Maharashtra-421201. PAN: AAWTS3794B Appellant) : Respondent) Appellant /Assessee by : Shri Vikrant Joshi, CA Revenue / Respondent by : Shri Mahendra Bishnoi, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 08.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 22.05.2025 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S, AM:
This appeal by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Pune [In short 'CIT(E)'] dated 10.12.2024. The assessee raised the following grounds of appeal:
SYF Foundation “A GROUNDS OF APPEAL
1. The learned CIT (Exemption) Pune has erred in rejecting the application of the Appellant Trust, despite the fact that all the documents asked for were duly submitted during the course of faceless proceedings before the CIT (Exemption).
2. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, and modify the aforesaid grounds of appeal at or any time before the hearing as may be advised from time to time. B RELIEF CLAIMED
1. The matter may please be remanded back to the office of the CIT (Exemption) for considering it afresh.”
2. The assessee is a charitable trust formed with the principle object of running Computer Literacy Programmes, Skill Development Programmes and Environment Education Programme in Schools and Colleges particularly in rural and semi-urban areas. The assessee got registered with Charity Commissioner under Maharashtra Public Trust, Act on 30.08.2018. The assessee has applied for permanent registration under section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) which was rejected for the reason that the assessee has mentioned a wrong section in the application. The assessee has corrected the aforesaid mistake and has filed fresh application for registration under section 12A of the Act. The said application is under process and pending with CIT(E). In the mean time the assessee has applied for registration under section 80G of the Act. The CIT(E) has rejected the application for registration under section 80G of the Act for the reason that “(i) Note on activity has not been furnished by you, Furnish activity note giving details viz dates and places of each activities carried out by your trust, details of beneficiaries, how they were identified etc. ii) You have not furnish any supporting credible evidences in respect of the activities. Kindly furnish the same. In absence of any such tangible material in respect of proof of activities being carried out it is not possible to arrive at any SYF Foundation conclusion about the genuineness of activities and also to ascertain as to whether the activities are in line with the objects of the trust/institution. (iii) It is seen that no credible evidence furnished in support of the activities claimed to have been carried out and it is seen that a very meager expenditure is shown on objects, the satisfaction about the genuineness of activities could not be arrived at.”
3. The assessee is in appeal before the tribunal against the order of the CIT(A).
4. We heard the parties and perused the material on record. The ld. AR submitted that the CIT(E) has rejected the application made under section 80G primarily for the reason that the documentary evidences called for have not been submitted. The ld. AR further submitted that all the relevant documents evidencing the various activities carried out by the assessee towards its object are available and prayed that one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee. We notice from the perusal of records that the assessee's application for registration under section 12A of the Act is pending with the CIT(E) (page 35 & 36 of PB). It is also notice that the assessee has collated with the evidences called for by the CIT(E) with regard to the registration under section 80G of the Act. Considering the facts peculiar in assessee's case and in the interest of natural justice and fair play, we are inclined to grant one more opportunity to the assessee to furnish the various documents called for by the CIT(E) and represent the case on merits before the CIT(E). Accordingly we remit the appeal back to the CIT(E) with a direction to consider the application made under section 80G of the Act along with the application made for registration under section 12A of the Act. The CIT(E) is further directed to call for the necessary documents as may be required in this regard and decide the case in accordance with law. The assessee is directed to submit the relevant details to support the claim for registration under section 80G of the Act and co-operate with the proceedings. It is ordered accordingly.
In result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.