Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a society, applied for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) and approval under Section 80G(5). The CIT, Exemption, Pune rejected the applications, citing discrepancies and dissatisfaction with the genuineness of activities and compliance with other laws. The assessee contended they were not given adequate opportunity to explain.
Held
The Tribunal found that the assessee had complied with notices but argued for another opportunity. The Tribunal set aside the CIT's order, remanding the matter back for fresh consideration after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The assessee was also directed to provide requisite documents.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT erred in rejecting the application for registration and approval without providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee to explain the discrepancies or furnish further documents.
Sections Cited
12A(1)(ac), 80G(5), 12AB
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE
Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: Both the above captioned appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated 28.09.2024 passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune rejecting the application for registration in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the IT Act filed on 28.03.2024 and denying the application for approval in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the IT Act filed on 27.03.2024.
& 1148/PUN/2025 : 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are, that the assessee is a society registered with Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950 and has filed application for registration in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of section 12(1)(ac) of the IT Act on 28.03.2024. 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 on 21.05.2024 by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune through ITBA portal 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 27.08.2024. The assessee complied with the said notice. However, Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune was not satisfied about the genuineness of the activities of the assessee and compliance of requirements of any other law for the time being in force by the assessee as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects and therefore rejected the application for registration and also cancelled the provisional registration granted to the assessee on 25.05.2022 & 1148/PUN/2025 u/s 12AB r.w.s. 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the IT Act. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
Ld. AR appearing from the side of the assessee submitted before us that Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune has not provided proper opportunity to the assessee, & therefore the order is not justified. It was submitted that if Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune was not satisfied with the explanation, he should have had provided another opportunity to the assessee to explain his case. Accordingly, it was requested before the Bench to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune and further requested to provide one opportunity to submit the documents/explanation in support of application for registration.
Ld. DR appearing from the side of the Revenue placed heavy reliance on the orders passed by the subordinate authorities 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 all the notices issued by the Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune. It is the sole contention of the assessee that if the reply of the assessee was not satisfactory Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune should have had provided at-least one more opportunity to the assessee to explain his case. We also find that Ld. CIT, Exemption, & 1148/PUN/2025 Pune in his rejection order observed that the assessee has not shown any expenditure for financial years 2020-21 and 2021-22 and in this regard Ld. Counsel of the assessee contended that the above period pertains to Covid-19 Pandemic and therefore no activity was conducted and accordingly no amount was spent. Considering the totality of the facts of the case & in the interest of justice and without going into the 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 in support of the application for registration, otherwise, Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. Thus, the grounds of appeal
raised by the assessee are partly allowed.
6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in is partly allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No.1147/PUN/2025 :
7. The instant appeal is against the order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune denying grant of approval u/s 80G(5) of the IT