ST. MARYS CHURCH SOCIETY,BALAPUR TALODHY NAGBHID CHANDRAPUR DISTRICT (M.S.) vs. ITO WARD-3, EXEMPTION,, NAGPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 604/NAG/2024Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 March 2026AY 2024-255 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessees deserved one more opportunity to explain their objects and activities for seeking registration under section 12AB. The Tribunal noted that the assessees had furnished certain details and evidence at the time of filing the application and also submitted a reply with additional details in response to the show-cause notice. While the CIT(E) viewed the reply as a mere list of donations and not a point-wise response, the Tribunal found it was not clarified whether the institutions to which donations were made had similar objectives. Consequently, the Tribunal restored the matters back to the file of the CIT(E) for reconsideration of the applications afresh. The CIT(E) was directed to provide a fair and reasonable opportunity to the assessees before passing an order. The assessees were also advised to be more vigilant in future regarding timely compliance and providing required details. The grounds of appeal were allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

These four appeals by different society-trusts (assessees) are against orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) [CIT(E)] rejecting their applications for registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessment year in all cases is 2024-25. The assessees filed online applications for registration, providing initial evidence. Following a show-cause notice from the CIT(E), the assessees submitted replies. The CIT(E) rejected the applications, citing non-compliance and failure to furnish required evidence to substantiate their objects, activities, and compliance with other laws. The assessees contended they had provided necessary details, while the revenue argued they failed to respond adequately to the notices. The appeals were heard together, with ITA No. 601/Nag/2024 treated as the lead case.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessees are eligible for registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, given the evidence and replies furnished to the CIT(E)? Assessee's contentions: The assessees argued that they are charitable trusts/institutions and had filed applications for registration under section 12AA/12AB on 27.03.2024. They submitted that all required evidence and information were furnished at the time of the online application and again in response to the show-cause notice. They contended that once evidence about their objects and activities was provided, they are eligible for registration under section 12AB. In the alternative, they prayed for the appeals to be restored to the CIT(E) for a fresh order considering the evidence. Revenue's contentions: The revenue argued that the assessees did not respond to the notices issued by the CIT(E) and failed to furnish required evidence. It was contended that the assessees' replies were not point-wise and did not adequately substantiate their objects, activities, and compliance with other laws, indicating a lack of interest in furnishing the required evidence. Therefore, the revenue argued that the assessees are not eligible for any relief and the appeals should be dismissed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 12AA,Section 254(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (4 matters)

ITA No. 601/NAG/2024
ITA No. 602/NAG/2024
ITA No. 603/NAG/2024
ITA No. 604/NAG/2024

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

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

1.

, 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.

3.

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.

4.

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.

7.

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.

More judgments on Section 12AB

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →