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

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1228/HYD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 February 2025AY 2024-256 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal decided to admit the additional evidence submitted by the assessee, noting that it was presented for the first time and could be crucial for deciding the appeals. The Tribunal referred to Section 254 of the Act and Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules, 1963, regarding the power to admit additional evidence. It reasoned that admitting the evidence would not prejudice the Revenue, whereas its exclusion would prejudice the assessee's rights. Therefore, for substantial justice, the Tribunal directed the CIT(Exemption) to admit the additional evidence and decide the cases afresh after considering it and providing the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard, in accordance with the principles of natural justice. This decision applied mutatis mutandis to both appeals. The grounds raised in both ITA No. 1227/Hyd/2024 and ITA No. 1228/Hyd/2024 were answered accordingly.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Wisdom Wings Charitable Trust, filed appeals against the orders dated 28/09/2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Hyderabad. The appeals for Assessment Year 2024-25 were clubbed as they pertained to the same assessee and involved interconnected issues. In ITA No. 1227/Hyd/2024, the assessee applied for registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in Form No. 10AB. The CIT(Exemption) rejected the application, citing inadequate financial details to verify the genuineness of the trust's activities and expenditure. In ITA No. 1228/Hyd/2024, a similar rejection occurred for registration under Section 80G of the Act, also due to insufficient information. The assessee presented additional evidence before the ITAT, seeking its admission and a fresh opportunity before the CIT(Exemption).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the learned CIT(Exemption) was justified in rejecting the assessee's application for registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on the grounds of inadequate financial details and genuineness of activities and expenditure (Section 12AB). 2. Whether the learned CIT(Exemption) was correct in rejecting the assessee's application for registration under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to inadequate information regarding the genuineness of activities and expenditure (Section 80G). Assessee's Contentions: The assessee argued that it had furnished relevant documents and information. However, the CIT(Exemption) deemed it inadequate. The assessee submitted a paper book containing 116 pages as additional evidence before the Tribunal, requesting its admission and a further opportunity to present its case before the CIT(Exemption). Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue supported the order of the learned CIT(Exemption) and opposed the assessee's request for remitting the matter back to the CIT(Exemption).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 80G,Section 254

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”, HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA

For Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Hearing: 27/01/2025

आदेश / ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M: Aggrieved by the orders dated 28/09/2024 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemp�on)-Hyderabad (“learned CIT(Exemp�on)”), in the case of Wisdom Wings Charitable Trust (“the assessee”), assessee preferred the cap�oned two appeals for the AY 2024-25. Since these appeals pertain to the same assessee and the issues involved therein are inter-connected, these two appeals are clubbed, heard together and disposed of in this consolidated order. 2. Brief facts of the case in are that the assessee filed an applica�on in Form No. 10AB before the learned CIT (Exemp�on) seeking registra�on U/s. 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”). Accordingly, no�ces with respect to the proceedings U/s. 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act were issued to the assessee and called for certain details / informa�on along with Memorandum of Associa�on / Trust Deed for verifica�on. In reply, the assessee submi�ed some informa�on, which, according to the learned CIT (Exemp�on), is par�al and therefore, the learned CIT(Exemp�on) asked the assessee to furnish full informa�on vide no�ce dated 19/09/2024. In reply, the assessee furnished the informa�on.

3.

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.

4.

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.

5.

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.

6.

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).

7.

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.

8.

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

in are answered accordingly.

1.

9. With respect to 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.

10.

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 which is adjudicated in the foregoing paras of this order, our decision given therein (in mutatis mutandis applies to the assessee’s appeal in 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.

11.

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.

More judgments on Section 12AB

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →