Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's applications for registration under Section 12AB and approval under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were rejected by the CIT(E) due to consistent non-compliance with notices and failure to furnish requisite details. The assessee appealed, claiming lack of adequate opportunity and e-filing system malfunction, but failed to appear before the Tribunal or provide any supporting evidence for its claims.
Held
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(E)'s rejection, finding that the assessee did not respond to repeated notices from the CIT(E) nor appeared before the Tribunal or filed any documentary evidence. The Tribunal concluded that there was no reason to interfere with the CIT(E)'s orders rejecting the applications.
Key Issues
Whether the rejection of application for registration under Section 12AB and approval under Section 80G by the CIT(E) was justified due to the assessee's non-compliance, and if the assessee was denied adequate opportunity.
Sections Cited
12AB, 80G, 12A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA
PER VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT : These two appeals by the Assessee are directed against two separate Orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) [in short “learned CIT(E)”], Hyderabad, both dated 18.06.2025 whereby the application of the assessee for registration u/sec.12AB as well as approval u/sec.80G of the Income Tax Act [in short "the Act"], 1961 were rejected.
2 ITA.Nos.1247 & 1248/Hyd./2025 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee when these appeals were called for hearing. Even nobody appeared till the Bench retires on discharge of the Board of the day i.e., on 22.12.2025. It transpires from the record that even on the earlier two occasions, nobody appeared on behalf of the assessee and notices were issued to the assessee through speed post AD as well as email on the email-ID given in Form-36. The notice issued through speed post AD received back with the postal remark “incomplete address” which was given by the assessee in Form- 36/Memo of appeal. However, the notices issued through email on the email-ID given in Form-36 were duly delivered, but, nobody has appeared on behalf of the assessee and, therefore, the Bench was left with no option, but to hear and dispose of these appeals ex-parte.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
1. “That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax Exemption) erred both in law and on facts in rejecting the application for registration u/s 12AB without appreciating the genuine nature of activities and charitable objectives of the appellant institution 2. That the rejection of application is based solely on alleged "non- compliance" with notices dated 27.03.2025, 19.05.2025, and 3 ITA.Nos.1247 & 1248/Hyd./2025 06.06.2025, without considering the practical challenges and procedural issues that prevented timely submissions 3. That the appellant was not given adequate and effective opportunity to furnish documents as there was either no Intimation received or the e-filing system malfunctioned, which prevented uploading of documents on the ITBA portal.
4. That the appellant is a genuine religious-cum-charitable institution conducting bona fide activities since inception, and there was no finding that activities were not genuine.
5. That the Commissioner failed to make any adverse comment on the objects of the trust or any evidence to suggest that the trust was not engaged in charitable/religious activities 6. That the rejection of the application merely on procedural lapses, without examining the substantive merit and nature of activities of the appellant, is arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice.
7. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, modify or withdraw any of the above grounds at the time of hearing.”
In the grounds of appeal, the assessee has submitted that the assessee was not given adequate and effective opportunity to furnish the documents as there was either no intimation received or the e-filing system malfunction are prevented for uploading of the documents on the ITBA portal. However, the assessee has not brought any material on record to show that there was a malfunction of the ITBA portal.
4 ITA.Nos.1247 & 1248/Hyd./2025 5. The learned DR has submitted that despite the repeated notices issued by the learned CIT(E), there was no response on behalf of the assessee to comply with the notices as well as filing the requisite details and documents before the learned CIT(E) and consequently, the applications of the assessee were rejected. Due to non-compliance of the notices and non-furnishing of the requisite details and documents, the learned CIT(E) was not satisfied about the genuineness of the activities of the assessee as well as the overall affairs of the assessee trust that its activities are carried out to achieve the objects of the trust. The learned DR has thus, contended that the assessee is a non-serious organisation and, therefore, the learned CIT(E) has rightly rejected the applications of the assessee for registration u/sec.12AB as well as approval u/sec.80G of the Act.
6. We considered the grounds of appeal
, the submissions of the learned DR and carefully perused the impugned orders of the learned CIT(E). The learned CIT(E) has issued notices dated 27.03.2025, 19.05.2025 and 06.06.2025. However, there were no compliance/response on 5. ITA.Nos.1247 & 1248/Hyd./2025 behalf of the assessee to these notices and, therefore, the requisite details and documents were not submitted by the assessee before the learned CIT(E) for examination and arriving to the decision that the activities of the assessee trust are genuine and are being carried-out to achieve the objects of the trust as well as charitable nature of the objects of the trust. Thus, due to no compliance on behalf of the assessee, the applications were rejected by the learned CIT(E) by giving reasons in Para nos.4 to 6 as under :
“4. Non-compliance 4.1. As mentioned in point numbers 2.2 to 2.4 the applicant NGO was issued two questionnaires and also final opportunity letter to furnish the requisite details.
4.2. However, the applicant NGO did not comply to the any of the above three notices. Therefore, for the above reasons also the application filed in form 10AB seeking registration cannot be considered.
Moreover, as explained in para 2 of this order, as per the provisions of section 12AB (1)(b) clause (ii) (B) of the I.T. Act, 1961, if the application is made under sub-clause (ii) or sub-clause (iii) or sub-clause (v) of section 12A(1)(ac) and the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner has not satisfied, he can reject the application as well as cancel the registration of the Society/institution.
6 ITA.Nos.1247 & 1248/Hyd./2025 5.1. Considering all the above facts, the application filed under the section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) in Form 10AB is not maintainable and as such deserves for rejection.
Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the application filed by the applicant on 05.12.2024 in Form 10AB u/s.12A(1)(ac) (iii) seeking registration us/12AB of the Act is rejected for the reasons enumerated in para 2.1. to 2.4 of this order.”
Thus, it is clear that despite repeated notices, the assessee did not respond to any of the notices issued by the learned CIT(E) and, therefore, failed to file the relevant details and documents so as the learned CIT(E) satisfy himself about the genuineness of the activities of the trust, the charitable nature of the objects of the trust as well as the activities are carried out for achieving the objects of the trust. Even before the Tribunal, the assessee has neither appeared nor filed any documentary evidence in support of the applications. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any reason to interfere with the Orders of the learned CIT(E) in rejecting the application of the assessee for registration u/sec.12AB as well as approval u/sec.80G of the 7 ITA.Nos.1247 & 1248/Hyd./2025 Act which is consequential to the registration u/sec.12AB of the Act.
In the result, appeals of the Assessee are dismissed. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 24.12.2025.