SRI KOKKESHWARA EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITALBE TRUST ,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, (EXEMPTIONS)WARD-3, BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1537/BANG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 November 20254 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 146 days in filing the appeal, finding sufficient cause that prevented the assessee from filing within the prescribed period. Regarding the grounds raised, the Tribunal noted that the CIT(E) rejected the application due to non-compliance with notices. The assessee's plea was that its accountant, entrusted with tax matters, failed to act. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to grant the assessee one more opportunity. The application in Form 10AB was restored to the file of the learned CIT(E) for de novo adjudication after providing a reasonable and adequate opportunity of hearing. The assessee was directed to furnish all requested information. The impugned order was set aside, and the grounds raised by the assessee were allowed for statistical purposes. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sri Kokkeshwara Educational and Charitable Trust, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bangalore, challenging an order dated December 17, 2024, passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) - Bangalore. The impugned order rejected the assessee's application in Form 10AB for registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal was filed with a delay of 146 days. The assessee attributed the delay to its staff accountant, who failed to respond to or forward notices issued by the CIT(E), a fact discovered during the audit for FY 2024-25. The management then took steps to file the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the impugned order dated December 17, 2024, passed under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is void, liable to be set aside for haste, violation of natural justice, and being opposed to facts? (Question of law and fact) 2. Whether the learned CIT(Exemptions) erred in rejecting the registration under Section 12AB of the Act? (Question of law and fact) 3. Whether, without prejudice, the Tribunal may direct the learned CIT(Exemptions) to treat the application under Section 12A as withdrawn and not rejected? (Question of law and fact) Assessee's Contentions: The assessee argued that the order was passed in haste, violating principles of natural justice. The rejection was due to the negligence of its staff accountant who failed to respond to notices, and this was not intentional. The assessee sought an opportunity to represent its case properly. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment records no specific contentions from the Revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL

Hearing: 13.11.2025

PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

The assessee has filed the present appeal challenging the impugned order dated 17.12.2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) –Bangalore, [“learned CIT(E)”], rejecting the application filed by the assessee in Form 10AB for seeking registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (“the Act”).

2.

The present appeal is delayed by 146 days. Along with the appeal, the assessee has filed an application seeking condonation of the delay in filing the present appeal. As per the assessee, the management had entrusted the responsibility of attending to the income tax matters to its staff accountant, who was instructed to take advice from the Chartered Accountant. Subsequently, it was Sri Kokkeshwara Educational and Charitable Trust, Bangalore Page 2 of 4 noticed that the accountant neither replied to the notices nor forwarded the notices to the Chartered Accountant of the assessee trust. During the audit of the books of account for the financial year 2024-25, it was noticed that the assessee’s application for regularization of the registration under section 12A of the Act has been rejected for non-compliance of the notices issued by the learned CIT(E). It is further submitted that thereafter, the management of the assessee trust took necessary steps for filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. Accordingly, it is prayed that the delay in filing the present appeal is not intentional and the assessee does not stand to benefit from such delay.

3.

Having considered the submissions and perused the material available on record, we are of the considered view that there was sufficient cause which prevented the assessee from filing the present appeal within the prescribed limitation period. Accordingly, the delay in filing the present appeal is condoned, and we proceed to hear the appeal on the merits.

4.

In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds: -

1. The impugned order dated 17.12.2024 passed u/s 12AB of the Act is void and liable to be set aside as it is passed in haste violating the principles of natural justice and opposed to the facts of the case.

2. The ld. CIT (Exemptions) erred in rejecting registration u/s 12AB of the Act.

3. Without prejudice, the Hon’ble Tribunal may be pleased to direct the ld. CIT (Exemptions) to treat the subject application u/s 12A as withdrawn and not rejected.

4. The appellant craves leave to add or delete or modify or revise any ground at the time of hearing before the Hon’ble Tribunal.

Sri Kokkeshwara Educational and Charitable Trust, Bangalore Page 3 of 4 5. Having considered the submissions and perused the material available on record, it is evident from the record that the learned CIT(E) rejected the application filed by the assessee under section 12AB of the Act due to non-compliance with notices. As noted in the foregoing paragraphs, it is the plea of the assessee that its accountant, who was entrusted by the management to attend to the income tax proceedings and was instructed to take advice from the Chartered Accountant, neither replied to the notices issued by the learned CIT(E) nor forwarded the same to the Chartered Accountant.

6.

In the light of the facts and circumstances of the present case, we are of the considered view that, in the interest of justice, the assessee be hereby granted one more opportunity to represent its case before the learned CIT(E). Accordingly, we deem it appropriate to restore the application filed by the assessee in Form 10AB for seeking registration under section 12AB of the Act to the file of the learned CIT(E) for de novo adjudication as per law after providing the reasonable and adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to furnish all the information as may be sought by the learned CIT(E) without any default in support of its claim of seeking registration under section 12AB of the Act. With the above directions, the impugned order is set aside, and the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

7.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 14th Nov, 2025

More judgments on Section 12AB

All 5,972 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →