Loading judgment…
Facts
The appellant, Jijamata Mahila Vikas Va Shikshan Sanstha, challenged the Ld. CIT(E)'s order dated 26.03.2024, which denied registration under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act. The denial was based on alleged non-compliance with Section 36A of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950, and doubts regarding the genuineness of the School Development Fund, without proper consideration of the appellant's submissions.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the Ld. CIT(E) had not properly examined the appellant's submissions or granted a fair opportunity to be heard. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the Ld. CIT(E)'s order and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication, directing the Ld. CIT(E) to provide the appellant a proper opportunity to substantiate its case with requisite details.
Key Issues
Whether the Ld. CIT(E) was justified in denying registration under Section 12AA/12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, without adequately considering submissions or providing proper opportunity, particularly concerning compliance with Section 36A of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act and the genuineness of the School Development Fund.
Sections Cited
12AA, 12A, 12AB, 12A(1)(ac)(iii), Section 36A of Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & MS. ASTHA CHANDRA
PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The captioned appeal at the instance of appellant is directed against the order framed by ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune dated 26.03.2024 denying grant of registration u/s.12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( in short ‘the Act’).
2. Appellant has raised following grounds of appeal :
“1. ERRED IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION IN FORM 10AB 1.1 The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) ['the Ld. CIT(E)'] erred in not granting the regular registration u/s 12A/12AB of the Incometax Act, 1961 ['the Act'] and cancelling the provisional registration vide order dated 26.03.2024. 1.2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application for the unwarranted reasons by alleging that there is non-compliance of section 36A of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950 without considering the submission of the Appellant and also erred in doubting the genuineness School Development Fund which is completely unwarranted at the time of granting of registration.
1.3 In the above circumstances, the Appellant humbly pray before Your Honours that the order rejecting the application is bad in law and deserves to be set aside.”
3. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that ld.CIT(E) has not considered the submissions filed by the assessee during the course of the proceedings and therefore prayed for one more opportunity. Ld. Departmental Representative was fair enough not to oppose this request.
4. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the appellant filed an application for registration u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act on Form No.10AB on 26.09.2023. Various details were called for by the ld.CIT(E) to which the appellant submissions were filed. One of the grounds on which the ld.CIT(E) rejected the application was that the assessee did not obtain the permission from the Charity Commissioner u/s.36A of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950. Ld. Counsel for the assessee before us referred to the paper book containing 236 pages and stated that the trust raised loan of Rs.2.20 crore from Avanse Financial Services Ltd. which was utilised towards construction and development of property under trust and also statement of loan account along with letter for permission for Charity Commissioner and other required details were also attached. Similarly, there are certain other issues which as per the prayer made by the ld. Counsel for the assessee have not been examined by the ld.CIT(E) and also proper opportunity was not granted. In view thereof and in the larger interest of justice, we deem it proper to set-aside the order of ld.CIT(E) and the remit the issues back to the file of ld.CIT(E) for necessary adjudication afresh with a direction to grant an opportunity to the appellant to substantiate its case by filing Jijamata Mahila Vikas Va Shikshan Sanstha requisite details and decide the issue as per fact and law after giving due opportunity of being heard to the appellant. The appellant is also hereby directed to make its submissions, if any, before the ld. CIT(E) on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment unless for reasonable cause, failing which the ld. CIT(E) will be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. Thus, grounds of appeal raised by the appellant are allowed for statistical purposes.
5. In the result, the appeal of the appellant is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 08th day of April, 2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (ASTHA CHANDRA) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; �दनांक / Dated : 08th April, 2025. Satish
आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” ब�च, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 5. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE
BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1460/PUN/2024
Jijamata Mahila Vikas Va Vs. CIT (Exemption), Shikshan Sanstha, Pune Jafrabad, Jalna – 431 203 Maharashtra PAN : AABTJ9805B Appellant Respondent
Appellant by : Shri Shubham N. Rathi & Ms. Akshata S. Rathi Revenue by : Shri Amol Khairnar Date of hearing : 16.01.2025 Date of pronouncement : 08.04.2025 आदेश / ORDER
PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The captioned appeal at the instance of appellant is directed against the order framed by ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune dated 26.03.2024 denying grant of registration u/s.12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( in short ‘the Act’).
Appellant has raised following grounds of appeal :
“1. ERRED IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION IN FORM 10AB 1.1 The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) ['the Ld. CIT(E)'] erred in not granting the regular registration u/s 12A/12AB of the Incometax Act, 1961 ['the Act'] and cancelling the provisional registration vide order dated 26.03.2024. 1.2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application for the unwarranted reasons by alleging that there is non-compliance of section 36A of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950 without considering the submission of the Appellant and also erred in doubting the genuineness School Development Fund which is completely unwarranted at the time of granting of registration.
1.3 In the above circumstances, the Appellant humbly pray before Your Honours that the order rejecting the application is bad in law and deserves to be set aside.”
At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that ld.CIT(E) has not considered the submissions filed by the assessee during the course of the proceedings and therefore prayed for one more opportunity. Ld. Departmental Representative was fair enough not to oppose this request.
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the appellant filed an application for registration u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act on Form No.10AB on 26.09.2023. Various details were called for by the ld.CIT(E) to which the appellant submissions were filed. One of the grounds on which the ld.CIT(E) rejected the application was that the assessee did not obtain the permission from the Charity Commissioner u/s.36A of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950. Ld. Counsel for the assessee before us referred to the paper book containing 236 pages and stated that the trust raised loan of Rs.2.20 crore from Avanse Financial Services Ltd. which was utilised towards construction and development of property under trust and also statement of loan account along with letter for permission for Charity Commissioner and other required details were also attached. Similarly, there are certain other issues which as per the prayer made by the ld. Counsel for the assessee have not been examined by the ld.CIT(E) and also proper opportunity was not granted. In view thereof and in the larger interest of justice, we deem it proper to set-aside the order of ld.CIT(E) and the remit the issues back to the file of ld.CIT(E) for necessary adjudication afresh with a direction to grant an opportunity to the appellant to substantiate its case by filing Jijamata Mahila Vikas Va Shikshan Sanstha requisite details and decide the issue as per fact and law after giving due opportunity of being heard to the appellant. The appellant is also hereby directed to make its submissions, if any, before the ld. CIT(E) on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment unless for reasonable cause, failing which the ld. CIT(E) will be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. Thus, grounds of appeal raised by the appellant are allowed for statistical purposes.
5. In the result, the appeal of the appellant is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 08th day of April, 2025.