DNYAN PRABODHINI VIDYA MANDAL DONDAICHA,DONDAICHA vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD 1(1), NSK, NASHIK
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and set aside the CIT's order. The matter was remanded back to the CIT to decide the application afresh after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an application for registration under section 12AB, but the CIT, Exemption, rejected it and cancelled the provisional registration due to non-compliance with a notice. The assessee contended that proper opportunity was not provided and requested more time.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT provided a reasonable opportunity of hearing before rejecting the registration application, and whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
Dnyan Prabodhini Vidya Vs. CIT, Exemption, Pune. Mandal Dondaicha, Sr.No.190/1, Plot No.39, Dondaicha S.O. Sindkhede, Dhule- 425408. PAN : AAATD7889G Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Piyush Bafna Revenue by : Shri Amol Khairnar Date of hearing : 18.11.2025 Date of pronouncement : 19.11.2025 आदेश / ORDER
PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 14.10.2024 passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune rejecting the application for registration u/s 12AB of the IT Act.
There is delay in filing of the present appeal. We are satisfied with the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay duly supported by an affidavit that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. After hearing Ld. DR, we condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeal.
Facts of the case, in brief, are, that the assessee filed its application for registration in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of Act on 25.05.2024. With a view to verify the genuineness of 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 by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune through ITBA portal on 26.06.2024 requesting the assessee to upload certain information/clarification. The desired information was furnished by the assessee. On verification of said information furnished by the assessee, Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune found certain discrepancies in the information furnished by the assessee and issued another notice on 24.09.2024. Since the assessee has not furnished any reply in response to notice dated 24.09.2024, Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune rejected the application for registration and also cancelled the provisional registration granted to the assessee on 31.12.2021 u/s 12AB r.w.s. 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the IT Act.
4. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
Ld. AR appearing from side of the assessee submitted before us that Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune has not provided proper opportunity to the assessee and, therefore, the impugned order of Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune is not justified. It was submitted that the last notice was issued on 24.09.2024 asking for various information and other details and the compliance was required to be made on or before 01.10.2024. It was submitted that lots of information was already furnished by the assessee and again various information was required through the above notice dated 24.09.2024 and only six days were provided to the assessee to furnish the desired information. Ld. AR submitted before the Bench that Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune ought to have provided one more opportunity to the assessee since the last date to decide the application was 30.11.2024. Accordingly, it was requested before the Bench to set-aside the impugned order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune with a direction to provide at least one more opportunity to furnish the requisite documents/information as desired by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune.
6. Ld. DR appearing from the side of the Revenue relied on the order of Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune and requested to confirm the same.
We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record. We find that admittedly the assessee made compliance to the initial notice issued by the Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune and could not file reply in response to final notice. It is the sole contention of the assessee trust that one more opportunity may kindly be provided to furnish reply before Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune.
Considering the totality of the facts of the case, & also in the interest of justice and without going into merits of the case, we set- aside the order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune and remand the matter back to him with a direction to decide the application for registration afresh as per fact and law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to comply with the notices issued by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune and produce requisite documents/information/ submissions in support of the application for registration without taking any adjournment under any pretext, otherwise, Ld. CIT, Exemption,
More judgments on Section 12AB
- Desire Foundation, Jaipur vs Income Tax Officer, JaipurITA 1646/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Sheo Narayan Trust, Khajpura vs CIT Exemption, PatnaITA 554/PAT/2026[2025-2026]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2025-2026
- Ss Early Learning Society, Hyderabad vs CIT (Exemption), HyderabadITA 1208/HYD/2025[2026-27]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2026-27
- Shri Brajshiromani Laxmandas Sewa Trust… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(1), Mathura…ITA 592/AGR/2026[2026-2027]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2026-2027
- Shri Brajshiromani Laxmandas Sewa Trust… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(1), Mathura…ITA 591/AGR/2026[2026-2027]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2026-2027
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026