SHAHID CAPTAIN SUSHANT GODBOLE FOUNDATION,PUNE vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2852/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 March 2025AY 2025-26Bench: Dr. MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(E) did not grant adequate opportunity to the assessee and the short period given for compliance violated natural justice principles. The issue was remitted back to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's application for registration under Section 12AA and Section 80G was rejected by the CIT(E) for non-submission of supporting documents. The assessee claims that the CIT(E) did not provide adequate opportunity for them to submit the required evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) provided adequate opportunity to the assessee for submitting evidence for registration under Sections 12A and 80G, and whether the rejection violated principles of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AA,Section 80G,Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, B BENCH, PUNE

Before: Dr. MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Hearing: 05.03.2025Pronounced: 25.03.2025

आदेश/ORDER PER DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

1.

This appeal at the instance of assessee is directed against the order of CIT(E), Pune u/s 12AA & 80G of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, dated 23.10.2024

2.

Assessee has commonly raised following grounds of appeal:-

1. The Leamed CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application under Section 12AA solely on limitation grounds, disregarding the merits of the case.

2. The Leamed CIT(E) failed to provide adequate opportunity for the appellant to present evidence demonstrating the genuineness of charitable activities and compliance with Section 12A provisions violating the principles of natural justice.

3.

The Leamed CIT(E) disregarded the welfare-oriented intent of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the purpose of Section 12A, which is to promote charitable activities benefiting society.

4. The Leamed CIT(E)'s decision conflicts with the Directive Principles of State Policy within the Constitution of India. These principles highlight the legislative intent to support charitable trusts for the public good.

5. The Learned CIT(E) issued notice on 04-10-2024 requesting the appellant to file explanation to the discrepancies pointed out in the above notice, on or before 11-10-2024. Undisputedly, the time given to the appellant for compliance is less than a week, which is against the Standard Operative Procedure ('SOP') issued by the CBDT dated 19.11.2020, wherein, minimum period of 15 days is required to be given to the assessee to comply with notices from the date of issue of the notice. Recently, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Dauphin Travel Marketing Private Limited vs. ITO in W.P.(C) 8870/2023 & CM Nos. 33516-17/2023 dated 05.07.2023 taking note of this SOP held that the grant of insufficient time to respond the notice violates the principles of natural justice and, therefore, set-aside the assessment. Thus, it is clear that the appellant was given unreasonably very short period of time to respond to the notice, which is against the principles of natural justice.

6. The above grounds of appeal may kindly be allowed to be amended, altered, modified etc in the interest of natural justice.

3. At the outset Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the issues raised in instant two appeals needs to be restored to the file of Ld. CIT(E) since no adequate opportunity was provided to the appellant to file the evidence demonstrating the genuineness of charitable activities and compliance to provisions of section 12A and section 80G(5) of the Act. Ld. DR raised no objection in the matter and is restored to the file of Ld. CIT(E).

4.

We have heard rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. The application on Form 10AB filed u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) and 80G(5) of the Act on 22.06.2024 has been rejected by Ld. CIT(E) as the assessee did not filed supporting documents/evidence called for. Perusal of records indicates that adequate opportunity was not granted to the assessee.

5.

We therefore in the interest of justice and being fair to both the Parties remit the issue raised on merit regarding registration u/s 12A and section 80G(5) of the Act to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for necessary adjudication in accordance with Law for which assessee should be provided reasonable opportunity of hearing and assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take unnecessary adjournment. Accordingly all the grounds of appeal raised in & 2852/PUN/2024 are allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on this 25th day of March, 2025.

More judgments on Section 12AA

All 4,243 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →