KAPILA PARK,KENJAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIT (EXEMPTIOS) BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1188/BANG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 August 2025AY 2025-2026Bench: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY (Judicial Member), SHRI WASEEM AHMED (Accountant Member)3 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the Commissioner's order, finding it unsustainable due to the technical error. The case was remanded to the Commissioner with a direction to consider the application on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee sought registration u/s 12A of the Income Tax Act but mistakenly cited the wrong sub-section. The Commissioner rejected the application based on this mistake.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of a registration application u/s 12A solely on the ground of citing a wrong sub-section is sustainable when the intent is clear.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A,Section 12A(1)(ac)(i),Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL & SHRI WASEEM AHMED

For Appellant: Shri Srikrishna Kantila, CA, Shri Shivanand H Kalakeri

PER NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER

1.

This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 24-04-2025 impugned herein passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Bengaluru [in short ‘Ld.

Commissioner’] u/s 12A of the Income-tax Act 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’).

Kapila Park 2. In the instant case, the assessee had sought for registration u/s. 12A of the Act, but somehow mistakenly had mentioned the wrong provision/ sub-section i.e. 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act instead of 12A(1)(ac)(i) and therefore the Ld. Commissioner by taking cognizance of the said fact, vide cryptic order rejected the application filed by the assessee in Form 10AB on dated 24/04/2025 and therefore the impugned order is neither appreciable nor sustainable.

Thus, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case in totality for just and proper decision of the case, fair play, equitable relief and substantial justice, we deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned order and remand the case to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to consider the application already filed, under the correct provisions of the law, by side-lining the wrong mentioning of the provision and decide the application filed by the Assessee, on merits as per law. Thus, in the aforesaid terms, the case is accordingly remanded to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for decision on merit as per law.

3.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 11th August, 2025.

More judgments on Section 12A

All 6,064 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →