SANT JAGANADE MAHARAJ SHIKSHAN MANDAL,SINDKHEDE vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD 1(1), NSK, NAHSIK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1754/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 November 2025AY 2025-26Bench: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(Exemption) erred in rejecting the assessee's application for registration. It was noted that the CIT(Exemption) had not properly considered the documents submitted by the assessee, which demonstrated that the assessee's objects are charitable and its activities are genuine.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(Exemption) rejecting its application for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee is running a school in a tribal area of Maharashtra and has submitted all necessary documents, including its Trust Deed and financial details showing a significant portion of income from government grants.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of registration under Section 12A(1)(ac) by the CIT(Exemption) was justified, considering the documents and activities of the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A(1)(ac),Section 12A,Section 2(15),Section 12AB,Section 254(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

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

Before: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Bafna and Shri Aakash
For Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde - DR
Hearing: 18/11/2025Pronounced: 24/11/2025

Assessment Year: 2025-26 Sant Jaganade Maharaj V The Income Tax Officer, Shikshan Mandal, s. Exemption, Ward-1(1), Sr No.190/1, Plot No.38, Nashik. Dondaicha SO., Sindkhede, Dhule – 425408. Maharashrtra. PAN: AAABS1484Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Piyush Bafna and Shri Aakash Parakh – AR’s Revenue by Shri Amit Bobde - DR Date of hearing 18/11/2025 Date of pronouncement 24/11/2025 आदेश/ ORDER

PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:

1.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemption) dated 05.11.2024 rejecting registration under section 12A(1)(ac) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

“1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and as per provisions & scheme of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act), Hon'ble CIT(Exemption) Pune has erred in rejecting the application of the appellant trust for final registration u/s 12A of the Act and hence, the impugned order may be quashed and the registration under section 12A of the Act may kindly be restored.

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and as per provisions & scheme of the Act, the Hon'ble CIT(Exemption), Pune has erred in rejecting the application for registration under section 12A of the Act, and therefore the Appellant be granted opportunity to prove/ substantiate its charitable activities before Ld CIT(E) Accordingly, the order passed by the Ld. CIT(E) be kindly set aside and Appellant be granted just and proper relief in this respect.

3. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, modify, vary, or withdraw all or any of grounds of appeal, in the interest of justice, if necessary, at the time of hearing of the appeal.”

2.

We have heard both the parties and perused the records. Ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) of the assessee filed a paper book.Ld.AR submitted that Assessee had filed all the necessary documents before the Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemption). It is noted that the ld.CIT(Exemption) has rejected the application for Registration u/s.12A only on one ground of non-compliance. However, the Assessee has filed copy of the E-Acknowledgements and copy of the Form 10AB. On perusal of the E 2 Acknowledgements and Form 10AB it is noted that Assessee is [A] running school in Tribal Area of Maharashtra. Assessee filed copy of the approval issued by Government of Maharashtra dated 18/09/1997, 26/03/1997 to the Assessee for running school. It is also observed that 90% of the income shown by the Assessee in Income and Expenditure Account is in the form of Government Grants. This fact is also mentioned by the Assessee in the Form 10AB. The relevant portion of Form No.10AB is reproduced here under :

Sl. Financi Grants received Grants Othe Other Income Total No al Year from Central or receive r . State Government d from Spec Compa ific nies Gran under ts Corpor ate Social Respon sibility 1 2022 Rs.8,51,88,763 0 0 Rs.38,98,021 Rs.8,90,86,784 2 2021 Rs.6,87,37,459 0 0 Rs.25,41,432 Rs.7,12,78,891 3 2020 Rs.5,57,20,080 0 0 Rs.13,24,327 Rs.5,70,44,407 2.1 Thus for F.Y.2022-23 Total Income of the Assessee was Rs.8,90,86,784/- out of that Government Grant was Rs.8,51,88,763/- which is 95 %. Similar is for other years tabulated in the table above. This Table was filed before the Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemption), but he has not considered it at all.

3.

Assessee had filed these details before the ld.CIT(Exemption) as evident from the e-Acknowledgments. On perusal of these acknowledgments, it is noted that Assessee had filed totally 18 documents before ld.CIT(Exemption). However, ld.CIT(Exemption) has not even bothered to read any of the documents. Ld.CIT(Exemption) has not commented on any of the documents filed by the Assessee. Therefore, the statement of the Commissioner of Income Tax (exemption) in the rejection Order that assessee has not filed basic details is erroneous and devoid of any merit.

4.

Assessee has also filed copy of Trust Deed which is at 43 to 51 of the paper book. In the E-Acknowledgement, the Trust Deed is mentioned at serial number 3. It means the Assessee had filed Trust deed before the ld.CIT(E). Ld.CIT(E) has not commented on the objects of the assessee trust mentioned in the Trust deed. As per the Trust Deed the objects of the assessee are providing education, distribution of education material to poor students etc.

4.1 Ld.DR for the Revenue has accepted the fact that documents referred in the paper book were filed before ld.CIT(Exemption). 4 4.2 Thus, on perusal of the documents and for elaborate discussion, Assessee’s objects are charitable in nature as defined in Section 2(15) of the Act. Assessee is running a school which is as per the objects and it is charitable activity. Ld.CIT(Exemption) has not brought on record any violation of any other Act.

5.

The section 12AB which describes the procedure for registration is reproduced here as under: 12AB. (1) The Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, on receipt of an application made under clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A, shall,—

(a) where the application is made under sub-clause (i) of the said clause, pass an order in writing registering the trust or institution for a period of five years;

(b) where the application is made under sub-clause (ii) or sub-clause

(iii) or sub-clause (iv) or sub-clause (v) of the said clause,—

(i) call for such documents or information from the trust or institution or make such inquiries as he thinks necessary in order to satisfy himself about—

(A) the genuineness of activities of the trust or institution; and (B) the compliance of such requirements of any other law for the time being in force by the trust or institution as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects;

(ii) after satisfying himself about the objects of the trust or institution and the genuineness of its activities under item (A) and compliance of the requirements under item (B), of sub- clause (i),—

(A) pass an order in writing registering the trust or institution for a period of five years; or (B) if he is not so satisfied, pass an order in writing rejecting such application and also cancelling its registration after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard; 5.1 Thus, the Act has given mandate to the ld.CIT(E) to verify objects of the Trust and genuineness of its activities. And the ld.CIT(E) also has to satisfy that the Trust has followed other laws mentioned in the section. In the case under consideration, the ld.CIT(E) has not said any adverse thing about the objects of the Assessee and activities of the Assessee.

6.

The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT(Exemption) Vs. Reham Foundation LKO 418 ITR 205 vide order dated 26.09.2019 held as under : Quote“26. In view of the unfettered power of the Appellate Tribunal in terms of section 254(1) of the Act, 1961 theTribunal can very well record its satisfaction on the genuineness of the activities and object of the Trust andcan very well direct registration of the Trust without remand of case to the Commissioner in case suchsatisfaction is recorded on the basis of documents and material already available on record at the stage ofexamination by Commissioner.” Unquote.

7.

ITAT Pune Bench in the case of Suryodaya Science Foundation Vs. CIT(Exemption) in vide order dated 06.02.2023 has allowed the appeal of the Assessee. Similarly, ITAT Pune Bench in the case of Shivsiddhi Education Society vs. CIT(Exemption) in & 1786/PUN/2025 vide order dated 24.09.2025 has held that Assessee was eligible for registration 6 u/s.12A of the Act, and accordingly directed ld.CIT(Exemption) to grant registration.

8.

In these facts and circumstances of the case, we are convinced that Assessee is eligible for registration u/s.12A of the Act. Accordingly, we direct ld.CIT(Exemption) to grant registration u/s.12A of the Act, to the Assessee. Accordingly, Grounds of Appeal raised by the assessee are allowed.

9.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Delay : There is a delay of 172 days for filing appeal before this Tribunal. The Director of the Assessee filed an Affidavit containing reasons for the delay. We have perused the Affidavit and are convinced that there is sufficient and reasonable cause for the delay. Accordingly, we condone the Delay. Order pronounced in the open Court on 24 November, 2025. VINAY BHAMORE Dr.DIPAK P. RIPOTE JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पपणे / Pune; ददिधंक / Dated : 24 Nov, 2025/ SGR 7

More judgments on Section 12A(1)(ac)

All 537 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A(1)(ac) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →