WISDOM WINGS CHARITABLE TRUST,ATMAKUR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD

However, a�er considering the submissions of the assessee, the learned CIT(Exemp�on) observed that the assessee submi�ed inadequate financial details to verify the genuineness of the ac�vi�es and expenditure of the assessee in line with the objec�ves of the Trust. Thus, learned CIT (Exemp�on) rejected the assessee’s applica�on in Form 10AB for registra�on U/s. 12AB of the Act. Hence, the assessee is in appeal before us.

Mr. Mohammad Irfan Shaik, Trustee-cum-Secretary to the assessee appeared before us on behalf of the assessee and submi�ed that although the assessee has furnished the relevant documents / informa�on as called for by the learned CIT(Exemp�on) while applying for Final Registra�on U/s. 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act, learned CIT(Exemp�on) rejected the assessee’s applica�on by holding that the informa�on furnished by the assessee is inadequate and par�al informa�on.

Before the Bench, he filed a paper book runs into 116 pages which is in the form of addi�onal evidence in support of the assessee’s claim for Page 2 of 6 grant of registra�on U/s. 12AB of the Act. Therefore, he prayed that this addi�onal evidence may be admi�ed and the assessee may be granted one more opportunity before the learned CIT(Exemp�on) to present its case.

Learned Departmental Representa�ve (“learned DR”) vehemently argued in support of the order of the learned CIT(Exemp�on) and opposed to the prayer of the assessee for remi�ng the ma�er to the file of the learned CIT(Exemp�on).

We have gone through the record in the light of the submissions made on either side. On perusal of the learned CIT(Exemp�on) order, we find that the assessee’s applica�on U/s. 10AB seeking registra�on U/s. 12AB of the Act was rejected by the learned CIT(Exemp�on) by holding that the informa�on furnished by the assessee is not sufficient to verify the genuineness of the ac�vi�es of the assessee-Trust. Before us, the assessee has filed certain informa�on in the form of Paper Book in support of the assessee’s plea for registra�on U/s. 12AB of the Act and on a perusal of the same, we find that the same cons�tutes addi�onal evidence which may go to the root of the ma�er.

Section 254 of the Act read with Rule 29 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 states about power to admit additional evidence, whether mere fact that evidence sought to be produced is vital and important, does not provide a substantial cause to allow its admission. The additional evidence submitted by the assessee at this stage, before us, is the first time and is necessary for deciding the appeal of the assessee. Even otherwise, all the documents so placed on record by the assessee by way of additional evidence before the ld. CIT(Exemption) are necessary to adjudicate the application filed by the assessee U/s. 10AB for registration U/s. 12AB of the Act. Moreover, in case, the additional evidence so placed on record by the assessee is allowed then, no prejudice shall be caused to the Revenue. Whereas on Page 3 of 6 the contrary, in case, the said additional evidence placed on record by the assessee is not considered then, in that eventuality the rights of the assessee shall be prejudiced. Therefore, in view of the substantial justice, we direct the ld. CIT(Exemption) to admit additional evidence so placed on record by the assessee. Further, we direct the learned CIT(Exemption) to decide the case afresh after considering those additional evidence and also after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee as per the principles of natural justice. Thus, the grounds raised

9. With respect to we find that the core issue involved in this appeal is whether the learned CIT(Exemption) is correct in rejecting assessee’s application in Form No. 10AB seeking registration U/s. 80G of the Act by holding that the information / details submitted by the assessee is inadequate to verify the genuineness of the activities and expenditure of the assessee.

In this regard, the assessee filed certain additional evidence for the first time before the Bench which may go to the root of the matter. Therefore, considering the identical facts and circumstances of the present case with that of the assessee’s appeal in (in mutatis mutandis applies to the assessee’s appeal in ITA No. 1228/Hyd/2024 also. Accordingly, we admit the additional evidence submitted by the assessee and direct the learned CIT(Exemption) to decide the case afresh after considering the additional evidence and also after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee as per the principles of natural justice. The grounds raised by the assessee in ITA No. 1228/Hyd/2024 are answered accordingly.

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above. Order pronounced in the open court on this the 03rd February, 2025.