BAPU FOUNDATION FOR LEARNING ON MIND AND DISCOURSE,PUNE vs. CIT EXEMPTIONS, PUNE

In ITA No.172/PUN/2025 the assessee has challenged the order of the CIT(Exemption) in rejecting the application for registration u/s 12A of the Act while ITA No.185/PUN/2025 relates to the order of the CIT(Exemption) in denying the grant of approval u/s 80G of the Act. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee filed an application in Form No.10AB on 27.06.2024 for registration of the trust under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the Act. With a view to verify the genuineness of the activities of the assessee and compliance to requirements of any other law for the time being in force by the trust / institution as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects, a notice was issued through ITBA portal on 25.07.2024 requesting the assessee to upload certain information / clarification. In response to the same, the assessee filed certain details. The CIT(Exemption) while going through those details found certain discrepancies in the submissions filed by the assessee for which he issued another notice to clarify on those issues. However, in absence of any response from the side of the assessee trust, the CIT(Exemption) rejected the application filed by the assessee for grant of registration u/s 12A of the Act and also cancelled the provisional registration granted earlier u/s 12AB of the Act by observing as under: 4. Since he rejected the grant of registration u/s 12A of the Act and cancelled the provisional registration granted earlier, he refused to grant approval u/s 80G of the Act.

Aggrieved with such order of CIT(Exemption), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: 1. Basic principles of natural Justice being opportunity of being heard Audi alteram partem was not exercised by CIT Exemptions. Proceeding were initiated by CIT Exemptions against renewal applications of 12A AND 80G registrations filed wherein notice asking for additional information was issued dated 25/11/2024. The said Notice was not communicated to us in form of email intimation on the email id registered on e filing portal nor any hardcopy of notice was received on the registered 1 address. Hence, as the notice was never communicated to us we were not able to file our reply with all stated facts and provide details as required despite being available with us before the authority. Hence the authority considering no reply received rejected our applications leading to non compliance of basic principles of natural Justice. Therefore, we pray to the honorable appellate tribunal to remand back the said applications under appeal for hearings before the commissioner of Exemptions, Pune.

Similar grounds have been raised in ITA No.185/PUN/2025 which read as under: 1. Basic principles of natural justice being opportunity of being heard - Audi alteram partem was not exercised by CIT Exemptions. Proceeding were initiated by CIT Exemptions against renewal applications of 12A AND 80G registrations filed wherein notice asking for additional information was issued dated 25/11/2024. The said Notice was not communicated to us in any hardcopy of notice was received on the registered address. Hence, as the notice was never communicated to us we were not able to file our reply with all stated facts and provide details as required despite being available with us before the authority. Hence the authority considering no reply received rejected our applications leading to non compliance of basic principles of natural Justice. Therefore, we pray to the honorable appellate tribunal to remand back the said applications under appeal for hearings before the commissioner of Exemptions.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee in response to the first notice has filed various details. However, the assessee could not respond to the second notice issued by the CIT(Exemption) on account of mistake on the part of employee of the trustee. He accordingly submitted that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be given an opportunity to substantiate its case by filing the requisite details before the Ld. CIT(E).

The Ld. DR on the other hand strongly opposed the submissions made by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee.

We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the order of the CIT(E) and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. It is an admitted fact that the assessee did not respond to the second notice issued by the CIT(Exemption) in which he has asked for certain details on account of certain discrepancies found from the submissions made by the assessee earlier for which he rejected the application filed by the assessee for grant of registration u/s 12A of the Act and also cancelled the provisional registration granted earlier u/s 12AB. Since the application for grant of registration u/s 12A of the Act was rejected and the provisional registration granted earlier was cancelled, he rejected the application for grant of approval u/s 80G of the Act. It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that due to the mistake on the part of the employee of the trust, the assessee could not respond to the second notice. It is also his submission that given an opportunity, the assessee is in a position to substantiate its case by filing the requisite details before the Ld. CIT(E) to his satisfaction. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(Exemption) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case by filing the requisite details to his satisfaction and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also hereby directed to submit the details as called for by the Ld. CIT(E) on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which the Ld. CIT(Exemption) is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

अपील र्थी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent

4. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune DR, ITAT, ‘A’ Bench, Pune 5. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file.