AROGYA SAHAKARI MANDAL LTD,BARSHI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(5), SOLAPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the orders of the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) and remanded the issue to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. This was based on a subsequent favorable order for registration under Section 12A.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was filed against the CIT(A) order. The assessee's counsel submitted that the matter should be remanded due to a change in facts regarding registration under Section 12A.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessment order should be set aside and remanded due to a subsequent favorable order for registration under Section 12A, which was not available at the time of the original assessment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE
Before: SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM
PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM : This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-10, Pune dated 06.02.2018 for the Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Before me, at the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that this is case where the matter should be remanded to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication in view of change in facts. Mentioning that the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A) was made on 25.03.2015 and 06.02.2018 respectively, ld. Counsel submitted that, at the relevant point of time, the assessee does not have the favourable order relating to the registration u/s 12A of the Act for the assessee. The said order was passed later only on 29.09.2018. 3. Considering the above change in facts, on hearing the parties, I find the orders made by the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) have be to set- aside and the issue raised by the assessee before the Tribunal should be remanded to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication in view of the order passed by the PCIT u/s 12A of the Act dated 29.09.2018. The Assessing Officer shall grant reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee in accordance with set principles of natural justice. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 17th day of December, 2019. (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) लेखा सद" / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; "दनांक Dated : 17th December, 2019. Sujeet आदेश क" "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत/Copy of the Order is forwarded to : अपीलाथ" / The Appellant;
""यथ" / The Respondent;
The CIT(A)-10, Pune;
The Pr. CCIT, Pune; िवभागीय "ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे “एक-सद"य मामला” /
DR ‘SMC’, ITAT, Pune; गाड" फाईल / Guard file. 6. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स"यािपत "ित //// Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune
More judgments on Section 12A
- Desire Foundation, Jaipur vs Income Tax Officer, JaipurITA 1646/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Sanskardham Nandan, Mehsana vs CIT(Exemption), AhmedabadITA 2980/AHD/2026[2025-26]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2025-26
- Global University Foundation, Hyderabad vs CIT(Exemption), HyderabadITA 777/HYD/2026[2026-27]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2026-27
- Global University Foundation, Hyderabad vs CIT(Exemption), HyderabadITA 776/HYD/2026[2026-27]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2026-27
- Shiva Shiksha Samiti, Deendayal Puram, Up… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward-Exemption, Agra…ITA 415/AGR/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026