SHIV BAHUUDHESHIYA SEVABHAVI SANSTHA ,BEED vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), PUNE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's argument that the notices might have been missed and that one more opportunity should be given. The Tribunal set aside the CIT's order and remanded the matter back for fresh consideration after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an application for registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act. The CIT rejected the application after the assessee failed to comply with two notices seeking information and explanations regarding the genuineness of its activities and compliance with other laws.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT was justified in rejecting the application for registration without providing a further opportunity to the assessee, despite the assessee's submission that notices were missed.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 12AB,Section 12A(1)(ac),Section 12AB(1)(b)(i),Section 12A(1)(ac)(vi)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE
Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
Shiv Bahuudheshiya Vs. CIT (Exemption), Pune. Sevabhavi Sanstha, Majalgaon, Beed- 431122. PAN : AAMTS6927Q Appellant Respondent Assessee by Shri Umesh Kumar Mali : Revenue by : Shri Amit Bobde Date of hearing : 24.07.2025 Date of pronouncement : 28.07.2025 आदेश / ORDER
PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 05.11.2024 passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune rejecting the application for registration u/s 12AB of the IT Act.
Facts of the case, in brief, are, that the assessee filed application for registration in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the IT Act on 29.06.2024. 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 09.08.2024 requesting the assessee to upload certain information/clarification. The assessee did not comply to this notice. Another notice was issued on 21-10-2024 to furnish desired information & the assessee was specifically asked to show cause why the application for registration should not be rejected. Since the assessee did not comply to this notice also and has not furnished any explanation in reply to the above notice, Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune rejected the application filed by the assessee by observing as under :- “5. The information / details were called for under the provisions of section 12AB(1)(b)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. These are the basic details required to ascertain the overall nature of the activities of the assessee and are directly relevant to the present proceedings. However, the assessee has failed to comply despite giving sufficient opportunities as discussed above including an opportunity of being heard.
Thus, the assessee has failed to furnish the details called for under the provisions of section 12AB(1)(b)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to verify the genuineness of activities of the trust / institution and to verify the 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.
In absence of the compliance to the above requirement, it is not possible to arrive at any conclusion about the genuineness of activities of the assessee and the compliance to the 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.
It is clear from the above that the assessee was given sufficient opportunity to comply, but it has not complied to the same. It seems that the assessee is not having any supporting documents / evidence to submit. The assessee has failed to comply with the provisions of section 12AB(1)(b)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Hence, the undersigned is unable to draw any satisfactory conclusion about genuineness of activities of the assessee and the compliance to the 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. Therefore, the undersigned has left no alternative but to reject the application.
In view of the above, the application filed by the assessee is hereby rejected and the provisional registration granted on 29/03/2022 under section 12AB read with section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is hereby cancelled.” 2.1. It is the above order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
Ld. AR appearing from the side of the assessee submitted before us that the order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune is not justified. It is submitted that somehow the notices issued by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune were missed and could not be seen by the assessee therefore the information & documents desired by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune could not be furnished before him. Ld. AR submitted that since no reply was furnished before Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune the application for approval u/s 12A of the IT Act was rejected. Ld. AR submitted that the desired information is very well available with the assessee & if one opportunity is provided to him he will be able to produce all such desired information before Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune. Accordingly, Ld. AR requested before the Bench to set-aside the impugned order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune, involving the issue of registration u/s 12AB of the IT Act & requested to remand the matter back to him with a direction to decide the application for registration u/s 12AB of the IT Act afresh.
Ld. DR appearing from the side of the Revenue supported the order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune and requested to confirm the same.
In this regard, we find that admittedly two notices were issued by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune & both the above notices were not complied by the assessee. It is the sole contention of Ld. Counsel of the assessee that if the assessee has not furnished requisite information/documents on the requisite date, one further opportunity should have been provided to him by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune. It was also contended that the authorised person Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune & therefore could not supply the desired documents to the consultant who resultantly could not reply to the notices issued by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune, which consequently resulted in rejection of application for registration u/s 12AB of the IT Act. It was the sole prayer of Ld. AR that if one more opportunity is provided to the assessee, he will furnish all the desired documents/evidences and supporting evidences before Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune in support of application for registration u/s 12AB of the IT Act. 5.1 We find some force in the above arguments of Ld. Counsel of the assessee. Considering the totality of the facts of the case & in the interest of justice and without going into the merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to 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 approval 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
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 →- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026