SANVEDNA EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,THANE vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), PUNE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2379/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 November 20254 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal decided to set aside the impugned order of the CIT(E) and restore the issue to the file of the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. The reasoning was based on the assessee's ground that the application was rejected due to the selection of a wrong code. The Tribunal acknowledged a consistent view in similar cases where assessees should not be penalized for selecting the wrong code and should be given another opportunity to file the application with the correct code. The CIT(E) was directed to afford a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and pass a speaking order. The assessee was also directed to be vigilant, avoid unnecessary adjournments, and file all required details. The operative direction was to set aside the impugned order and allow the grounds of appeal for statistical purposes. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sanvedna Educational and Charitable Trust, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Pune Bench, against an order dated 05/08/2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune (CIT(E)). The CIT(E) had rejected the assessee's application for registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2011-12. The appeal was filed with a delay of 9 days. The ITAT noted that no one appeared on behalf of the assessee, and the appeal was adjudicated ex-parte. The delay was condoned by the Tribunal, citing justice-oriented approach and Supreme Court judgments. The primary reason for rejection by the CIT(E) was the failure of the assessee to furnish details, including a copy of regular registration in Form No. 10AC/10AD and a self-certified copy of registration under section 12A or 12AA granted prior to 01/04/2021.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the rejection of the assessee's application for registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the CIT(E) was justified, considering the assessee's alleged failure to furnish required documents and the selection of a wrong code for the application. Assessee's Contention (as understood from the Tribunal's discussion): The assessee contended that the application was rejected mainly due to the selection of a wrong code. The Tribunal noted that similar issues have been adjudicated, and a consistent view is to provide an opportunity to the assessee to rectify such errors. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through the CIT-DR, highlighted the assessee's failure to file details as called for by the CIT(E), specifically the non-furnishing of a copy of regular registration in Form No. 10AC/10AD and a self-certified copy of regular registration under section 12A or 12AA granted prior to 01/04/2021.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii),Section 12A,Section 12AA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE “B” BENCH : PUNE

Before: DR. MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

BEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No. 2379/PUN/2025 Sanvedna Educational and CIT (Exemption), Pune. Charitable Trust, C/o Chandu Hansha Dalvi vs. House No. 52, Owned House, Anand Koliwada, Dativali Village, Dive, Dist. Thane, Maharashtra PAN : AAGTS 4216 G (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : None For Revenue : Shri Amit Bobde, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 27.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 28.11.2025 ORDER PER : MANISH BORAD, AM

This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune [“CIT(E)”], dated 05/08/2025 framed under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”) for the Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12, whereby application for regulation registration u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(ii) has been rejected.

2.

When the case called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. We, therefore, proceed to adjudicate the appeal ex-parte qua assessee with the assistance of Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) and the documents available on record.

2 ITA.No.2379/PUN./2025 (Sanvedna Educational and Charitable Trust) 3. Registry has informed that there is a delay of 09 days in filing of the instant appeal. Application for condonation of delay, dated 11/10/2025 along with affidavit is placed on record. Various reasons have been mentioned in this application and duly considering the same, we find that the delay is not intentional and therefore adopting a justice oriented approach and also taking guidance from the judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. [(1987) 2 SCC 107] and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382), hereby condone the delay of 09 days in filing of the instant appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication.

4.

With the assistance of Ld. DR, we on perusal of the impugned order observe that there was a failure on the part of the assessee to file the details as called for by the Ld.CIT(E) which mainly included non-furnishing of copy of regular registration in Form No. 10AC/10AD and also non-furnishing of self-certified copy of regular registration u/s. 12A or 12AA of the Act granted prior to 01/04/2021.

5.

We on going through the grounds of appeal

, notice that in ground No.1 assessee has stated that assessee’s application has been rejected mainly on account of selection of wrong code. Such type of similar issues have come up for adjudication before this Tribunal in plethora of cases and a 3. ITA.No.2379/PUN./2025 (Sanvedna Educational and Charitable Trust) consistent view has been taken to provide that for such selection of wrong code, assessee should not be suffered and should be given one more opportunity to furnish the application selecting correct code under which it is required to file the application u/s. 12A of the Act.

6.

We therefore deem it appropriate to restore the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of Ld.CIT(E) relating to registration u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(iii). Needless to mention that Ld.CIT(E) in the set aside proceedings shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and shall pass a speaking order. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournments unless otherwise required for reasonable cause and file all the details called for by the Ld.CIT(E). Thus, impugned order is hereby set aside and effective grounds of appeals raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

7.

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 28.11.2025.

More judgments on Section 12AB

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →