SAHYADRI LOKSEVA FOUNDATION.,PUNE vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 960/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 July 2025AY 2024-25Bench: SHRI R.K. PANDA (Vice President), MS. ASTHA CHANDRA (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(E) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to submit the required documents and evidence to substantiate its case.

What were the facts?

The assessee's application for approval under Section 80G was rejected by the CIT(E) for not providing satisfactory evidence and explanations regarding its activities and compliance with conditions. The assessee failed to respond to a second notice with specific discrepancies, citing unavailability of documents from outside Pune.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) was justified in rejecting the application for approval under Section 80G without granting sufficient opportunity for the assessee to furnish required documents, especially when the assessee sought an adjournment due to external document unavailability.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G,Section 80G(5),Section 12A,Section 12AA,Section 12AB,Section 12A(1)(ac),Section 11

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI R.K. PANDA & MS. ASTHA CHANDRA

For Appellant: Shri Charuhas D. Upasani &, Shri Prashant Kulkarni
For Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde

आदेश / ORDER

PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM :

1.

The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 19.02.2025 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune [“CIT(E)”] whereby he rejected the application of the assessee filed before him in Form No. 10AB under sub clause (B) of (iv) of first proviso to sub- section (5) of section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”) on 26.09.2024.

2.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : “On facts and in law,

1. The learned The learned CIT (Exemption, Pune has erred in rejecting application for approval /renewal filed by Assessee under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) by passing order dated 19th February 2025.

2. The Ld. CIT Exemption erred in law and on facts in treating the application under Sub clause (B) of (iv) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G as non-maintainable for not providing any supporting documents / evidence to draw any satisfactory conclusion about genuineness of activities of the assessee and fulfilment of conditions laid down in clauses (i) to (v) of Section 80G(5) of the Act.

3. The Order passed by the CIT Exemption, Pune rejecting the assessee's application is not in keeping with provisions of law, is bad in law and thus the same needs to be set aside.

4. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or delete any of the above ground of appeal as and when required.”

3.

The brief facts are that on receipt of the assessee’s application filed in Form No. 10AB under sub clause (B) of (iv) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act along with annexures thereto, with a view to verify the genuineness of the activities of the assessee and fulfillment of the conditions laid down in clauses (i) to (v) of section 80G(5) of the Act, the Ld. CIT(E) issued notice on 06.11.2024 through ITBA portal requesting the assessee to upload certain information/clarification contained therein by 21.11.2024. On verification of the details/documents filed by the assessee, the Ld. CIT(E) noticed various discrepancies which were communicated vide issue of another notice dated 07.02.2025 duly served via e-portal/email, seeking compliance by 14.02.2025. The said discrepancies are reproduced below :

“(i) In respect of your activity details, kindly furnish copies of bills/invoices of expenses done on each activities, etc. In case of tree plantation activity furnish the permission letter obtained from the owner of the place where trees has been planted. (ii) It is also seen that you have obtained regular registration under section 12AB of the Act read with clause (i) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the Act on 31/08/2021 but you were not registered under section 12A / 12AA of the Act prior to 01/04/2021 since the copy of such registration was neither attached with the original application while applying for such registration nor during the present proceedings. Therefore, the regular registration obtained by you seems to invalid. Furnish your explanation. (iii) Without prejudice to the above, you have filed application under section 80G(5) (iv)-ITEM(B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. However, as per financial statements, the trust has claimed deduction u/s 11 in earlier years. Therefore, said provisions of sec. 80G(5) (iv)-ITEM(B) of the Act are not applicable to your case. Furnish your explanation with documentary evidences."

3.1 As the assessee failed to submit any explanation to the discrepancies communicated to it, the Ld. CIT(E) presumed that the assessee has nothing to say in the matter. Having been unable to draw any satisfactory conclusion about the genuineness of the activities of the assessee trust and fulfillment of conditions laid down in clause (i) to (v) of section 80G(5) due to non-furnishing of any supporting documents/ evidence despite of giving sufficient opportunity to the assessee, the Ld. CIT(E) proceeded to pass the impugned order rejecting the application of the assessee by observing as under:

“7. Considering the above facts discussed in the show notice and discrepancies noticed and also that the assessee has not complied with the provisions of sub-clause (a) of clause (ii) of second proviso to section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as well as the provisions of Rule 11AA(2) of Income Tax Rules, 1962 in spite giving sufficient opportunities, the undersigned is unable to draw any satisfactory conclusion about the genuineness of activities of the assessee and fulfilment of conditions laid down in clause (i) to (v) of section 80G(5) of the Act.

8. It is clear that the assessee was given sufficient opportunity to comply, but it has failed to comply. It seems that the assessee is not having any supporting documents / evidence to submit. The assessee has failed to comply with the provisions of sub-clause (a) of clause (ii) of second proviso to section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and hence, the undersigned is unable to draw any satisfactory conclusion about genuineness of activities of the assessee and fulfilment of conditions laid down in clauses (i) to (v) of Section 80G(5) of the Act and has left no alternative but to reject the application.

9.

In view of the above, the application under sub clause (B) of (iv) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 filed by the assessee is hereby rejected.”

4.

Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and all the grounds of appeal relate thereto.

5.

The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee in response to the first notice has filed the various details. The assessee could not respond to the second notice issued by the CIT(E) on account of non-availability of certain information/ details/ documents which were to be procured from outside Pune. The assessee therefore sought an adjournment for 15 days, a proof of which was placed on record before the Bench. However, the Ld. CIT(E) proceeded to pass the impugned order ignoring the adjournment request made by the assessee. 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/ documents before the Ld. CIT(E).

6.

The Ld. DR had no objection the above request of the Ld. AR.

7.

We have heard both the sides, perused the order of the Ld. CIT(E) and the paper book filed by the Ld. AR on behalf of the assessee. It is an admitted fact that the assessee did not respond to the second notice issued by the Ld. CIT(E) 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 approval under section 80G of the Act. It is the submission of the Ld. AR that the assessee was not given sufficient time by the Ld. CIT(E) to file its response 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/documents before the Ld. CIT(E) to his satisfaction. Considering the totality of the facts and in the circumstances of the case, we deem it fit and proper in the interest of justice and fair play, to restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) 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/documents as called for by the Ld. CIT(E) on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which the Ld. CIT(E) 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.

8.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 29th July, 2025.

Sd/- Sd/- (R.K. Panda) (Astha Chandra) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 29th July, 2025. रदि आदेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. दिभ गीय प्रदिदनदि, आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण, “बी” बेंच, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. //सत्य दपि प्रदि// True Copy// आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,

िररष्ठ दनजी सदचि / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

More judgments on Section 80G

All 6,482 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →