Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, an educational trust, filed an application for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii). The CIT(E) rejected the application for final registration citing non-compliance regarding a copy of the provisional registration, despite the assessee having provided other details and arguing insufficient time was given.
Held
The Tribunal noted the delay in filing the appeal was condoned. Considering the submissions, the Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration, emphasizing that the assessee should be given due opportunity to present their case.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the registration application without affording sufficient opportunity and considering all documents, particularly when the trust is an educational institution?
Sections Cited
12A, 12A(1)(ac)(iii)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL & SMT. RENU JAUHRI
सुिवधई की िधरीख / Date of Hearing 16.04.2025 घोर्णध की िधरीख/Date of Pronouncement 17.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER RENU JAUHRI [A.M.]:- This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of rejection of application for registration u/s. 12A. dated 02/12/2024 of Ld. CIT(Exemption), Pune. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
1. Based on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in accordance with the law, the learned CIT (Exemptions), Pune erred in not granting sufficient opportunity to the appellant, to submit the order copy of provisional registration, thereby violating the principles of natural justice.
2. Based on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in accordance with the law, the learned CIT (Exemptions), Pune was not justified in denying the final Registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) ignoring the fact that the trust is an educational institution and undisputedly imparts education.
AY: 2025-26 Smt. Amirta Devi Educational Trust 3. Based on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in accordance with the law, the learned CIT (Exemptions), Pune has not provided sufficient time to submit the documents as stated in final SCN issued on 19/11/2024 with compliance date 26/11/2024 (only 7 days) thereby deprive the trust to comply the same.
4. Based on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in accordance with the law, the learned CIT (Exemptions), Pune failed to consider the documents submitted in response to the notice dated 22/07/2024, which proved the trust's educational activities, and rejected the 12A application on the technicality of not submitting the provisional registration copy.”
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an educational trust and had filed an application in Form 10AB on 26/06/2024 for registration u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act. Ld. CIT(E) issued a notice on 19/11/2024 to the assessee to submit a copy of the provisional registration in Form 10AC on or before 03/12/2024. The assessee could not make compliance to this notice and accordingly, Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application for final registration solely on this ground vide order dated 10/12/2024. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(E), the assessee has filed an appeal before the Tribunal.
At the outset, it is noticed that there is a 25 days’ delay in filing of the appeal. It has been submitted in the application for condonation that the assessee could not file the appeal in time as he did not have a full-time accountant to look after its affairs and the persons running the trust did not have full knowledge in this regard. Considering the explanation given by the assessee, the delay of 25 days is hereby condoned.
Before us, Ld. AR has explained that the assessee is a small trust which runs a school. A detailed questionnaire was issued by Ld. CIT(E) on 22/07/2024, to which the assessee made part compliance by furnishing various details. However, another notice was issued on 19/11/2024, vide which a copy AY: 2025-26 Smt. Amirta Devi Educational Trust of the provisional registration order was sought by Ld. CIT(E). As the time allowed was short, the assessee could not make compliance by the due date and hence Ld. CIT(E) proceeded to reject the application for registration without giving any further opportunity to the assessee. Ld. AR has also produced a copy of the provisional registration before us during the course of hearing and has requested that the matter may be remanded back to Ld. CIT(E) for fresh consideration.
Ld. DR has not objected to the above said proposition.
We have considered the rival submissions as well as the material placed before us. In the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter to Ld. CIT(E) for fresh consideration after giving due opportunity to the assessee.
In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 17.04.2025.