Loading judgment…
Facts
Multiple societies/trusts filed applications for registration under section 12AB. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) rejected their applications, stating that the assessees failed to furnish required evidence and a point-wise reply to the show cause notice. The assessees contended they had provided sufficient information and evidence.
Held
The Tribunal noted that while the assessees had provided some details, the CIT(E) was of the view that the response was not point-wise and lacked clarity regarding the activities of other institutions. The Tribunal decided to grant the assessees one more opportunity to explain their objects and activities, restoring the matter to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration.
Key Issues
Whether the rejection of registration under section 12AB by the CIT(E) for alleged non-compliance with providing required evidence and point-wise replies was justified.
Sections Cited
12AB, 12AA
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. These four appeals by different society-trust (assessee) are directed against the separate orders of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) [for short “CIT(E)”] rejecting application for registration of Trust/ society under section 12AB. Facts in all the appeals are similar, all the appellants/ assessees have raised certain similar grounds of appeal
, therefore, with the consent of both the parties, both the appeals were heard together. For appreciation of facts, the appeal in is treated as lead case.
2. Rival submissions of both the parties have been heard and record perused. The ld. Authorised Representative (AR) of the assessee submits that assessee is a charitable Trust /Institution, filed application for registration of Trust under section 12AA/12AB on 27.03.2024. At the time of filing online application, the assessee furnished all the required evidence and information. to 604/Nag/2024 (A.Y. 2024-25) C. S. C. Education Society &Ors. In response to show cause notice by ld. CIT(E) the assessee again furnished required details. The ld. A.R. submits that once the assessee furnished evidence about the object and activities, the assessee is eligible for registration under section 12AB. The ld. AR of the assessee prayed for allowing all the appeals with direction to ld. CIT(E) for granting registration forthwith. In alternative and without prejudice submission, the ld. AR of the assessee submits that all the appeals may be restored to the file of ld. CIT(E) for passing the order afresh, after considering the evidence on record.
On the other hand, ld. CIT–DR for revenue submits that assessee has not responded in response to notice issued by CIT(E). the ld. CIT(E) in his finding has clearly recorded that the assessee failed to furnish required evidence, the assessee in its reply dated 22.09.2024, did not furnish point wise (issue wise) reply response to show cause as it has been clearly recorded in para- 6. Thus, from the conduct of assessee it was clear that they are not interested in furnishing the required evidence to substantiate object, activities and compliance on any other law, entitling them for registration under section 12AB, therefore, all the assessees are not eligible for any relief from this Tribunal. All the appeals may be dismissed.
We have considered the rival submissions of both the parties and have gone through the orders of lower authorities carefully. On perusal of impugned order passed by ld. CIT(E), we find that at the time of the filing application online the assessee furnished certain details and evidence. Further, in response to the show cause notice dated 15.09.2024, the assesse also filed its response with certain other details vide reply dated 20.09.2024. The ld. to 604/Nag/2024 (A.Y. 2024-25) C. S. C. Education Society &Ors. CIT(E) was of the view that assessee has not furnished point-wise reply to his notice and merely furnished list of donations made by it. However, it is not clarified whether such institutions have similar objectives as of the assessee. He was further of the view that donations given to other institutions is as per objects of the assessee. Resultantly, the application of assessee for registration under section 12AA/12AB was rejected for the want of compliance. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in our view the assessee deserves one more opportunity to explain its objects and activities for seeking registration under section 12AB, therefore matter is restored back to the file of CIT(E) to re–consider the application afresh. Needless to direct that before passing the order, the ld. CIT(E) shall allow fair and reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to be more vigilant in future towards making timely compliance and providing required details to the office of CIT(E). In the result, the grounds of appeal
raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. is allowed for statistical purposes. to 604/Nag/2024
6. We find that the facts in these appeals are similar; the assessee(s) in their respective appeals have raised similar grounds of appeal. Thus, considering the facts, we have restored similar appeal in to the file of ld CIT(E), hence, these appeals are restored back with similar directions. to 604/Nag/2024 (A.Y. 2024-25) C. S. C. Education Society &Ors.
In result, the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order was pronounced on 12.03.2026 as per Rule 34 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963.