CHANDRAMARI TRUST,COIMBATORE, TAMILNADU vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHENNAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay and remanded the matter back to the CIT(E). The CIT(E) is directed to provide one more opportunity to the assessee to furnish the required details for verification and then decide the application afresh.
What were the facts?
The assessee, Chandramari Trust, filed an application for registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(E) rejected the application as the assessee failed to furnish required documents, despite multiple opportunities. The appeal was filed with a delay of 201 days.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee is entitled to another opportunity to furnish documents for registration under Section 12AB after the CIT(E) had already rejected the application due to non-compliance.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi
Year: - Chandramari Trust, Vs. The Commissioner of 90, Pinnacle Residency, PRP Gardens, Income Tax (Exemptions), Bharathi Colo, Avinashi Road, Chennai. Coimbatore 641 004. [PAN: AACTC3285D] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri V. Balaji, Advocate ��थ� की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri C.N. Bipin, CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 23.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 24.10.2025 आदेश /O R D E R
PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 07.11.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai rejecting the application dated 16.05.2024 in Form No. 10AB under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] seeking registration under section 12AB of the Act.
We find the appeal is filed with a delay of 201 days. The assessee filed affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admitted the appeals for adjudication.
We note that the assessee filed online application on 16.05.2024 in Form No. 10AB under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act seeking registration under section 12AB of the Act. The ld. CIT(E), while processing the application, asked the assessee to furnish certain documents including Note on activities and annual accounts/financial statements of the Institution, certified copies of certain important documents, etc. mandatorily required for verification. Since the assessee could not furnish the details, the ld. CIT(E) rejected the application filed in Form 10AB seeking registration under section 12AB of the Act.
The ld. AR Shri V. Balaji, Advocate submits that the notice issued by the ld. CIT(E) has been received by the assessee’s employee, who left the office of the assessee and the assessee-trust was not aware of notice as well as show-cause notice issued by the ld. CIT(E). As the assessee- trust undertakes to furnish complete details as required by the ld. CIT(E) as per statement of facts filed along with Form No. 36, the ld. AR prayed for affording one more opportunity for filing the details as called for.
The ld. DR Shri C.N. Bipin, CIT drew our attention to para 2.2 & 3.1 of the impugned order and submits that the ld. CIT(E) afforded various opportunities to the assessee for furnishing the details, but, it was not availed.
Taking into consideration of the submissions of the ld. AR and the ld. DR, in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(E) to afford one more opportunity to the assessee for furnishing the details for verification for grant of registration under section 12AB of the Act and decide the application afresh after considering the details for processing the application as may be filed by the assessee. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 24th October, 2025 at Chennai.
More judgments on Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii)
- Desire Foundation, Jaipur vs Income Tax Officer, JaipurITA 1646/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Sevasetu Foundation, Vadodara vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)…ITA 3149/AHD/2026[NA]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026
- Sevasetu Foundation, Vadodara vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)…ITA 3148/AHD/2026[NA]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026
- Sanskardham Nandan, Mehsana vs CIT(Exemption), AhmedabadITA 2980/AHD/2026[2025-26]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2025-26
- D vs Welfare Foundation, Thanevs.Income Tax…ITA 6191/MUM/2026[2025-26]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2025-26
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Gagan Bihari Rout@Gagan Rout vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Sushama Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026