Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed appeals challenging the order of the CIT(E) rejecting their application for registration under Section 12AB. The CIT(E) had observed that the Trust deed intended to utilize funds outside India and the Trust failed to amend clauses aligning with the Income Tax Act. The assessee stated they were in the process of amending the clauses and wanted to submit additional documents.
Held
The Tribunal restored the matter back to the file of the CIT(E) granting one more opportunity to the assessee to submit all relevant documents. This was subject to a cost of Rs. 2000 imposed on the assessee for non-cooperation. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) was justified in rejecting the registration application without considering the assessee's willingness to amend the Trust deed and submit additional documents? Whether allowing one more opportunity to the assessee is in the interest of justice?
Sections Cited
250, 12AB, 80G
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH MUMBAI
Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR
Date of Hearing 01.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement 04.04.2025 आदेश / ORDER
PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM:
The present appeals have been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order 28.12.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) / CIT(E), for the A.Y 2024-25. First of all we take up ITA No. 1128/Mum/2025. A.Y 2024-25
At the outset we noticed that application for grant of registration u/s 12AB in the case of assessee was rejected by CIT(E) by observing that the object in the MOA / Trust deed conveys the intention of the assessee to utilize the funds outside India. It was also observed that the Trust ought to amended the clauses to align with the provisions of the Income-tax Act, which the applicant failed to do so.
However, Ld. AR stated at bar that the applicant trust is under process of amending the clauses of the object in the MOA / Trust deed and also wants to submit additional documents which are necessary for adjudicating the application for grant of registration as the same could not be filed by the assessee earlier because of circumstances beyond their control.
On the contrary, Ld. DR argued that the appeal filed by the assessee is without any substance and the same may be dismissed.
Be that as it may, in our view the interest of justice would be met in case one more opportunity is granted to the applicant to submit all the relevant documents before Ld. CIT(E) subject to cost of Rs.2000 imposed upon the assessee for his non-cooperation. This amount shall be deposited in the Prime Minister Relief Fund and a copy of the receipt shall be placed on file before Ld.CIT(E) within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
Keeping in view our above discussion the matter is restored back to the file of CIT(E) with a direction to decide the same afresh on merits after providing fair opportunity of hearing to both the parties. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of proceedings.
Before parting, we make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld.CIT(E) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(E) independently in accordance with law.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Since, we have already restored the appeal No.1128/Mum/2025 to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for afresh adjudication and the present appeal is against the order of rejection of approval u/s 80G of the Act which back to the file of CIT(A).
In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.