Loading judgment…
Facts
The appeals were filed against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) refusing to grant registration under Section 12AB and approval under Section 80G(5)(ii) of the Income Tax Act. The assessees had failed to provide necessary documents and details to the CIT(E) in response to notices. The CIT(E) passed ex-parte orders rejecting the applications for renewal.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessees sought an opportunity to present their case and submit additional documents. Accepting the request in the interest of justice, the Tribunal remitted the matters back to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication, allowing the assessees to represent their case and submit necessary evidence.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) was justified in rejecting the applications for registration and approval without providing the assessees adequate opportunity to submit documents and explanations, and whether the matters should be remanded for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
12AB, 80G(5)(ii), 10AB
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT
Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI & DR. DINESH MOHAN SINHA
ORDER Per, Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha, JM: Captioned 16-appeals filed by different assessees pertaining to refusal order to grant registration is directed against the order passed M. Application No.CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD/2025- 26/12AA/16583 by CIT(E) u/s 80G(5)(ii) dt.29.10.2025, of the Income tax Act.
First, we note that there are several appeals, we shall decide ITA No.769/RJT/2025. Since, the issues involved in all these appeals are common and identical therefore, these appeals are being disposed of by this consolidated order. For the sake of convenience, the grounds as well as the facts narrated in in the case ITA No.718 & 719/Rjt/2025, 724 & 725/Rjt/2025, 728 & 729/Rjt/2025, 731 to 733/Rjt/2025, 762 to 764/Rjt/2025, 766 to 769/Rjt/2025 Lohana Yuvak Pragti Mandal and Others of Lohana Yuvak Pragti Mandal for Exemption have been taken into consideration for deciding the above appeals en masse, which are as under: 3. That the assesse has challenged the order of CIT Exemption dt. 29.10.2025 that the main ground of appeal
are under: That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax Exemptions,
2. Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in refusing to grant registration U/S 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
4. This is an application for approval under Section 80G(5)(ii) of the I.T. Act, 1961 filed in Form no. 10AB electronically on 20.06.2025. Notices were issued to the applicant with a request to submit certain details/documents. On perusal of details available on record, we note that Ld. PCIT pass an order, Notices were issued from time to time which were duly served on the assesse, requesting to furnish details/documents. That there was no response to the notices issued to the applicant neither filed any submission/details/documents nor it has sought any adjournment in this case. And, documents as per Rule 11AA(2) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 and other details/documents called for by this office were also not submitted. Hence, the applicant/assessee has failed to file documentary evidences to enable CIT(E) to satisfy about: (A) The genuineness of activities of such institution or fund; and (B) The fulfilment of all the conditions laid down in clauses (1) to (v) of section 80G(5) of the act. In view of the above, the present application filed in Form No. 10AB for renewal is rejected by order dt. 29.10.2025.
An appeal was filed by the assesse against the impugned order before us.
During the course of argument, the AR requested for an opportunity to explain and submit the relevant documents in support of the application for to 733/Rjt/2025, 762 to 764/Rjt/2025, 766 to 769/Rjt/2025 Lohana Yuvak Pragti Mandal and Others approval. On the other hand, the Ld. DR has relied on the order of the CIT(E), however the Ld. DR has not objected to the request of the Ld. AR.
We have heard, the rival contention of both the parties and perused the record available before us, we note that the Ld. CIT Exemption has passed the ex-parte order and assessee wants to submit additional documents and evidences in respond to application for approval. In the interest of justice and fair play, we accept the request of the assesse and grant an opportunity to represent the case before the Ld. CIT(E), therefore matter is remitted back to file by the Ld. CIT Exemption for fresh adjudication.
That This is an application for approval under Section 80G(5)(ii) of the I.T. Act, 1961 That are disposed of in the above terms.
Now, we shall take ITA 719/RJT/2025 that the assesse has challenged the order that the main ground of appeal
are under:
1. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax Exemptions, 2 Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in refusing to grant registration U/S 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The assessee has applied for registration (renewal) for the trust has been filed in Form10AB under sub-clause (ii) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dt. 29.10.2025.
That the application for approval under Section 80G(5)(ii) of the I.T. Act, 1961 filed in Form no. 10AB electronically on 20.06.2025. Notices were issued to the applicant with a request to submit certain details/documents. On perusal of details available on record, we note that Ld. PCIT pass an order, Notices were issued from time to time which were duly served on the to 733/Rjt/2025, 762 to 764/Rjt/2025, 766 to 769/Rjt/2025 Lohana Yuvak Pragti Mandal and Others assesse, requesting to furnish details/documents. That there was no response to the notices issued to the applicant neither filed any submission /details/documents nor it has sought any adjournment in this case. And, documents as per Rule-17A(2) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 and other details/documents called for by this office were also not submitted. Hence, the applicant/assessee has failed to file documentary evidences to enable CIT(E) to satisfy about: (A) The genuineness of activities of such institution or fund; and (B) The fulfilment of all the conditions laid down in clauses (1) to (v) of section 80G(5) of the act. (C) That other laws material for the purpose of achieving objects are complied with.
In view of the above, the present application filed in Form No. 10AB for renewal is rejected by order dt. 29.10.2025.
The assesse has filed an appeal against the impugned order dt. 29.10.2025 before us.
During the course of argument the AR has requested for an opportunity to explain the case, and submit the documents before CIT(E). On the contrary, the AR has relied on the order of CIT(E) but not objected the prayer of the assesse.
We have heard, the rival contention of both the parties and perused the record available before us, we note that the Ld. CIT Exemption has passed the ex-parte order and assessee wants to submit additional documents and evidences in respond to application for approval. In the interest of justice and fair play, we accept the request of the assesse and grant an opportunity to to 733/Rjt/2025, 762 to 764/Rjt/2025, 766 to 769/Rjt/2025 Lohana Yuvak Pragti Mandal and Others represent the case before the Ld. CIT(E), therefore matter is remitted back to file by the Ld. CIT Exemption for fresh adjudication.
ITA No. 725/RJT/2025, ITA No.733/RJT/2025, ITA No.762/RJT/2025, are disposed of in above terms.
That all the total appeals (ITA No.718/RJT/2025, and ITA No.724/RJT/2025, ITA No. 725/RJT/2025, ITA No.728/RJT/2025, ITA No.729/RJT/2025, ITA No.731/RJT/2025, ITA No.732/RJT/2025, ITA No.733/RJT/2025, ITA No.762/RJT/2025, , filed by the assessee is hereby allowed, for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced in the open Court Today on 01/04/2026.