THE CENTRE FOR APPLIED SOCIAL SCIENCES,DELHI vs. ITO(EXMP) 2.1, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4693/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 April 2025AY 2024-25Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to decide the application afresh after considering all the documents produced by the Appellant and providing an opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The Assessee filed an application for registration under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act, which was rejected by the Ld. CIT(E) on the grounds that the research projects were not education as per Section 2(15) and activities were not undertaken during the year. The Assessee contended that documentary evidence was not considered.

What were the issues?

Whether the Ld. CIT(E) erred in rejecting the Section 12A registration application without considering the documentary evidence submitted by the assessee?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 2(15),Section 12A,Section 12A(1)(b),Section 11

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA

Hearing: 08/04/2025Pronounced: 17/04/2025

Appellant Respondent Assessee by Mrs. Arati Vissanji, Adv Revenue by Sh. Daya Inder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR Date of Hearing 08/04/2025 Date of Pronouncement 17/04/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:

The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) (‘Ld. CIT(E)’ for short] dated 27/09/2024 pertaining to Assessment Year 2024-25.

2. The grounds of appeal are as under:-

“1. In the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(E) erred in holding that the research projects of the appellant are not education u/s. 2(15) of the Act and the activities of the appellant were not undertaken during the year, without considering the documentary evidence submitted and consequently, erred in rejecting the application for final registration u/s 12A of the Act. Accordingly, it is humbly requested that a direction be given to Ld. CIT(E) to issue the certificate of final registration u/s 12A of the Act for a period of five years w.e.f. AY 2024-25 to AY 2028-29.

2.

In the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, it is humbly submitted to give necessary directions that the filing of audit report u/s 12A(1)(b) of the Act in Form No. 10BB for the AY 2024-25 upon disposal of the appeal under reference shall be due compliance in law to exempt the income in accordance with the provisions of section 11 of the Act.

3.

It is humbly prayed that the reliefs as prayed for hereinabove and/or such other reliefs as may be justified by the facts and circumstances of the case and as may meet the ends of justice should be granted.

4.

The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground which may be necessary." 3. Brief facts of the case are that, the Appellant filed application in form No. 10AB for registration u/s 12(1)(ac)(vi)-ITEM(B) of the Income Tax, 1961 (‘Act’ for short) before the Ld. CIT(Exemption), Delhi. The application filed by the Appellant came to be rejected by the CIT(Exemption) vide order dated 27/09/2024, which has been called in question in the present Appeal on the grounds mentioned above.

4. The Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submitted that, the Ld. CIT(E) has passed the order impugned without considering the documentary evidence submitted by the Appellant. The Ld. Counsel has also filed paper book producing several documents to substantiate the claim of the Assessee. Thus, sought for allowing the appeal.

5.

Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that even after providing ample opportunities, the applicant has submitted inadmissible documents and failed to corroborate with those documents by making submissions. In the absence of note consisting of details of activities carried out by the trust since its inception, year wise along with detailed photographs, bills and vouchers and details of places where these activities have been carried out, the Ld. CIT(E) rightly rejected application filed by the Appellant. Thus, sought for dismissal of the Appeal.

6.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is seen from the order of the Ld. CIT(E) the application has been rejected on the ground that the Appellant has not substantiated its claim by providing documentary evidence such as, note consisting of details of activities carried out by the trust since its inception, year wise along with detailed photographs, bills and vouchers and details of places where these activities have been carried out. It is the case of the Assessee that though the documents have been produced before the Ld. CIT(E), the same has not been considered while passing the order impugned. In view of the above facts and circumstances, we restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to decide the application afresh after considering all the documents produced by the Appellant and pass the order in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Appellant.

The Appellant is also at liberty to produce all the document as required by the Ld. CIT(E) to substantiate it’s the claim.

7.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Appellant is partly allowed for statistical purpose.

More judgments on Section 2(15)

All 2,878 judgments and leading authorities on Section 2(15) →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →